Gerald Matlofsky

Following a successful summary judgment motion in an abortive real estate transaction, the plaintiffs sought partial indemnity costs of $35,668.79.

The defendant requested a stay of the costs assessment pending the resolution of crossclaims and third-party claims, or alternatively, a reduction in the quantum.

The court dismissed the request for a stay, finding the main action was concluded.

The court awarded the plaintiffs their requested costs, noting the amount was reasonable and within the defendant's expectations, as evidenced by the defendant's own costs outline of $43,670.00.

The plaintiffs (purchasers) brought a motion for summary judgment for the return of their $60,000 deposit after an abortive real estate transaction, and for the dismissal of the defendant vendor's counterclaim for breach of contract.

The agreement of purchase and sale was conditional on financing and review of a status certificate.

The conditions were not waived in writing by the deadline, rendering the agreement null and void.

The vendor argued the purchasers waived the conditions by their conduct.

The court granted summary judgment, finding no genuine issue requiring a trial, as the conditions were not waived and the purchasers made no misrepresentations.

The deposit was ordered returned and the counterclaim dismissed.

The plaintiffs brought a motion to continue an interim Mareva injunction against the defendants following an aborted real estate transaction.

The plaintiffs also moved to file fresh evidence and for security for costs.

The court found the plaintiffs established a strong prima facie case and a serious risk of asset dissipation, continuing the injunction against the defendants' real estate properties.

The motions to file fresh evidence and for security for costs were dismissed.

Following an order setting aside a default judgment, the court determined the costs thrown away payable to the plaintiff and the costs of the motion payable to the defendant.

The plaintiff was awarded $16,500 in costs thrown away on a substantial indemnity basis, after reductions for unrelated enforcement proceedings and a recoverable sheriff's fee.

The defendant was awarded $3,500 in costs for the motion on a partial indemnity basis, as the court found the defendant's settlement offer did not trigger Rule 49 consequences and success was somewhat divided.

The plaintiff brought a motion for summary judgment against the defendants for compensatory and punitive damages arising from an investment scheme.

The plaintiff alleged breach of contract for failure to refund his investment, as well as fraud and conspiracy to defraud.

The court granted partial summary judgment against the corporate defendant for $90,000, finding a binding agreement to refund the 2007 investment.

However, the court dismissed the motion for summary judgment on the fraud and conspiracy claims, concluding that a full appreciation of the conflicting evidence and credibility issues required a trial.