Young v Vaknin

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

Young v Vaknin 2018 NY Slip Op 30129(U) January 22, 2018 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 651000/2016 Judge: Kathryn E. Freed Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip Op 30001(U), are republished from various New York State and local government sources, including the New York State Unified Court System's eCourts Service. This opinion is uncorrected and not selected for official publication. [*FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 01/23/2018 10:47 AM 1] NYSCEF DOC. NO. 38 INDEX NO. 651000/2016 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 01/23/2018 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK NEW YORK COUNTY PRESENT: PART __2 __ HON. KATHRYNE. FREED Justice ---------------------------------------------------------------------------X JOHN YOUNG, INDEX NO. 651000/2016 Plaintiff, MOTION DATE -v003 MOTION SEQ. NO. ALON VAKNIN, BEN YEHIEL HARUSH Defendant. DECISION AND ORDER -----------------------------------------------------------------------------X The following e-filed documents, listed by NYSCEF document number 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 36 were read on this motion to/for REJECT REFEREE'S REPORT Upon the foregoing documents, it is ordered that the motion is decided as follows. In this action to recover on a promissory note, plaintiff John Young moves, pursuant to CPLR 4403, to reject the Referee Report and Recommendation of Special Referee Jeremy Feinberg, dated May 25, 2017, in which report Mr. Feinberg determined, after a traverse hearing conducted on April 10, 2017, that service of process on defendant Alon Vaknin was improper. Upon rejection of the report, plaintiff seeks the entry of a judgment against Vaknin in the amount of$1,393,746.80, plus interest at the rate of 14% per annum from April 15, 2015. The facts of this matter are set forth in detail in the interim decision and order of this Court dated March 3, 2017. Doc. 22. 1 Pursuant to that order, this Court granted plaintiffs motion, pursuant to CPLR 3213, for summary judgment in lieu of complaint as against defendant Ben ' All references are to the documents filed with NYSCEF in connection with the captioned action. 651000/2016 YOUNG, JOHN vs. VAKNIN, ALON Motion No. 003 Page 1of5 1 of 5 [*FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 01/23/2018 10:47 AM 2] NYSCEF DOC. NO. 38 INDEX NO. 651000/2016 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 01/23/2018 Yehiel Harush in the amount of $1,393, 746.80, plus interest at the rate of 14% per annum from April 15, 2015. Id. This Court granted plaintiffs motion for summary judgment in lieu of complaint as against Vaknin only to the extent of referring lhis matter to a Special Referee for the purpose of conducting a traverse hearing to determine whether service of process on Vaknin was proper. Id. On April 10, 2017, Special Referee Feinberg conducted a traverse hearing at which he heard the testimony of Vaknin and the process server who purported to serve him. Doc. 30. On May 25, 2017, Special Referee Feinberg issued a "Referee Report and Recommendation" in which he concluded that plaintiff failed to properly serve Vaknin. Doc. 31. Plaintiff now moves, pursuant to CPLR 4403, to reject the Referee Report and Recommendation and to direct that a judgment be entered in his favor and against Vaknin in the amount of $1,393, 746.80, plus interest at the rate of 14% per annum from April 15, 2015. New York Courts will generally "look with favor upon a Referee's report, inasmuch as the Referee, as a trier of fact, is considered to be in the best position to determine the issues presented." Namer v. 152-54-56 W 15th St. Realty C01p .. 108 A.D.2d 705, 706 (I st Dept. 1985) quoting Matter of Holy Spirit Assn. for Unification of World Christianity v. Tax Commn. ofthe City ofNew York. 81 A.D.2d 64 (1st Dept. 1981), revd on other grounds 55 NY2d 512 (1982). "It is well settled that where questions of fact are submitted to a [R]eferee, it is the function of the [R]efcree to determine the issues presented, as well as to resolve conflicting testimony and matters of credibility, and generally courts will not disturb the findings of a [R]eferee 'to the extent that the record substantiates his findings and they may reject findings not supported by the record.'" Kardanis v Velis, 90 AD2d 727, 727 (1st Dept 1982) quoting Matter ofHoly Spirit Assn.. 81 AD2d, at 71. 651000/2016 YOUNG, JOHN vs. VAKNIN, ALON Motion No. 003 Page 2 of 5 2 of 5 [*FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 01/23/2018 10:47 AM 3] NYSCEF DOC. NO. 38 INDEX NO. 651000/2016 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 01/23/2018 Here, smce Special Referee Feinberg "conducted a hearing that was fair and comprehensive, identified the issues, resolved all matters of credibility, and reached a conclusion that is supported by the evidence, the report must be confirmed." Jan S. v Leonard S., 26 Misc3d 243, 884 NYS2d 848, 858-859 (Sup Ct New York County 2009) citing Nager v Panadis, 238 AD2d 13 5, 13 5-136 (1 51 Dept 1997). Further, this Court agrees with Special Referee Feinberg that the case of Vid v Kaufinan, 282 AD2d 739 (2d Dept 2001 ), relied on by plaintiff, does not warrant a different result since there was "far more evidence" that.the defendant in that case was served at his actual place of business. Thus, plaintiffs motion to reject the report is denied and the report is confirmed. Doc. 26, at p. 8. Plaintiff asks in the alternative that, in the event this Court confirms the report, that he be granted "leave to re-serve the papers in this action ton Vaknin] under the existing index number.'· Pltf. 's Aff. In supp., at par. 14. However, since no such alternative relief is sought in the notice of motion or the wherefore clause of his affirmation, this relief cannot be granted. See CPLR 2214 (a); Arriaga v Michael Laub Co., 233 AD2d 244 (P1 Dept 1996). Even if plaintiff had properly requested this alternative relief, he fails to address why he is entitled to an extension of time to serve V aknin for "good cause shown" or in the "interest of justice." See CPLR 306-b. Therefore, in light of the foregoing, it is hereby: ORDERED that the motion by plaintiff John Young to reject the Referee Report and Recommendation of Special Referee Jeremy Feinberg, dated May 25, 2017, is denied; and it is further 651000/2016 YOUNG, JOHN vs. VAKNIN, ALON Motion No. 003 Page 3 of 5 3 of 5 [*FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 01/23/2018 10:47 AM 4] NYSCEF DOC. NO. 38 INDEX NO. 651000/2016 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 01/23/2018 ORDERED that the Referee Report and Recommendation of Special Referee Jeremy Feinberg, dated May 25, 2017, is hereby confinned; and it is further ORDERED that plaintiffs motion is otherwise denied; and it is further ORDERED that the complaint is dismissed as against defendant Alon Vaknin and the Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment accordingly; and it is further ORDERED that this matter is referred to a Special Referee for the purpose of conducting an inquest to calculate the reasonable attorneys' fees to be awarded to plaintiff; and it is further ORDERED that within 14 days of the entry of this order on the NYSCEF system, plaintiff shall file a Note of Issue, pay the appropriate fees, and serve a copy of this order with notice of entry, as well as a completed information sheet, on the Special Referee Clerk at sprefnyef@nycourts.gov, who is directed to place this matter on the calendar of the Special Referee's part for the earliest convenient date and notify all parties of the hearing date; and it is further ORDERED that, within twenty days hereof, plaintiff shall serve a copy of this order on defendants Alon Vaknin and Ben Yehiel Harush and on the Trial Support Office at 60 Centre Street, Room 158; and it is further 651000/2016 YOUNG, JOHN vs. VAKNIN, ALON Page 4 of 5 Motion No. 003 4 of 5 [*FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 01/23/2018 10:47 AM 5] NYSCEF DOC. NO. 38 INDEX NO. 651000/2016 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 01/23/2018 ORDERED that motion sequence 001 is hereby resolved by the instant decision and order; and it is further ORDERED that this constitutes the decision and order of this Court. 1/22/2018 DATE CHECK ONE: · CASE DISPOSED GRANTED APPLICATION: DENIED SETTLE ORDER CHECK IF APPROPRIATE: 0 DO NOT POST 651000/2016 YOUNG, JOHN vs. VAKNIN, ALON Motion No. 003 ~ ~-FINAL DISPOSITION GRANTED IN PART SUBMIT ORDER FIDUCIARY APPOINTMENT D D OTHER REFERENCE Page 5 of 5 5 of 5

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.