Dara Hirbod

The plaintiff and the defendant were in a common law relationship and owned a home as joint tenants.

After they separated, the defendant retained lawyers to sever the joint tenancy by transferring her interest to herself as a tenant-in-common.

The plaintiff brought multiple actions against the defendant and her lawyers, alleging conspiracy, deceit, and fraudulent conveyance.

The defendants moved for summary judgment.

The court granted summary judgment, dismissing the claims against the lawyers and the conspiracy/fraudulent conveyance claims against the defendant, finding no unlawful act, no agreement to injure, and no damages suffered by the plaintiff.

The plaintiff's cross-motions, including for criminal contempt and constitutional declarations, were also dismissed.

A case conference was held to manage multiple related actions.

The court noted that Commercial List matters were being traversed to the regular Civil list.

Directions were given for the filing of outstanding pleadings, setting aside defaults by consent, and establishing a mutually convenient discovery schedule with a target completion date of December 31, 2022.

The court also provided instructions for scheduling anticipated motions, including a potential Mareva injunction and a motion to join the trials.

A case conference was held regarding five related actions, three of which were on the Commercial List and two were regular civil matters.

Counsel agreed that the actions should be case managed together for efficiency.

The judge agreed to act as the case management judge for all five cases, which will require transferring the Commercial List actions to regular civil actions.

The plaintiffs, owners of a laundromat business, brought an action against their landlords for wrongful distraint, unlawful termination of their commercial lease, conversion, and defamation.

The landlords had seized the premises without notice, changed the locks, and posted notices accusing the plaintiff of fraud and embezzlement.

The court found the distraint and lease termination were unlawful, as a landlord cannot simultaneously terminate a lease and distrain property.

The court also found the landlords liable for conversion of the business and for defamation due to the false and malicious notices.

The plaintiffs were awarded $362,675 in total damages, including $50,000 for defamation and $50,000 in aggravated and punitive damages.

The defendants' counterclaim for alleged rental arrears was dismissed.

The plaintiff real estate brokerage brought a motion for summary judgment seeking $187,500 in commission from the defendant for an alleged breach of a Buyer Representation Agreement.

The defendant opposed the motion and maintained a counterclaim for damages, alleging the agreement was incomplete when signed and backdated.

The court found significant contradictory evidence regarding the execution and terms of the agreement, concluding there were genuine issues requiring a trial.

The motion for summary judgment was dismissed, as the use of enhanced fact-finding powers would not be in the interests of justice.