Kanwar Dhaliwal

The plaintiff, a holding company for a professional athlete, purchased a luxury home from the defendant corporation.

Shortly after moving in, the occupants were confronted by a stranger looking for the previous tenant, a known crypto fraudster who had been kidnapped and whose angry investors frequently visited the property.

The plaintiff brought a motion for summary judgment seeking rescission of the agreement of purchase and sale.

The court granted the motion, finding that the vendor made a fraudulent misrepresentation by marketing the property as private and secure while knowing of the ongoing safety risks.

The court also found that the safety risk constituted an undisclosed latent defect that rendered the property unfit for habitation.

The court ordered rescission of the contract and, in the alternative, equitable damages.

The plaintiffs brought a motion to hold the defendant in contempt of court for repeatedly refusing to attend examinations for discovery in breach of multiple court orders.

The court found the defendant in civil contempt, noting his deliberate manipulation of the process and failure to comply despite prior indulgences.

The defendant was sentenced to 60 days of incarceration, a $10,000 fine, and ordered to pay $170,000 in costs on a substantial indemnity basis.

The law firm Torkin Manes brought a motion to remove itself as lawyer of record for the defendants.

The firm had been receiving instructions from an individual who subsequently stopped communicating with them regarding this action and a companion proceeding.

Due to the inability to receive instructions, the court found an irreconcilable breakdown in the lawyer-client relationship and granted the motion to remove the firm as lawyer of record.

The plaintiffs brought motions to compel the examination of a defendant on behalf of a corporate defendant and for further and better affidavits of documents from several defendants.

The parties agreed to dismiss the examination motion and portions of the production motion without prejudice.

The court ordered one defendant to produce certain financial documents relevant to personal enrichment and an itemized Schedule B list, but dismissed the remaining requests for further documents and better email descriptors, finding insufficient evidence of missing documents and that the current descriptors were proportionate.