UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

MIAMI DIVISION

CASE NO.

PALM SPRINGS MILE ASSOCIATES, LTD., 

a Florida limited partnership, 

Plaintiff,

vs.

RENT-A-CENTER EAST, INC.,

a Delaware corporation,

Defendant.

_________________________________________/

COMPLAINT

PALM SPRINGS MILE ASSOCIATES, LTD. hereby sues RENT-A-CENTER EAST, 

INC., and alleges as follows:

The Parties and Jurisdiction

1. This is an action for breach of leases and guarantees, seeking damages in excess of 

$165,000.

2. Plaintiff PALM SPRINGS MILE ASSOCIATES, LTD. (“Plaintiff” or “Landlord”) 

is a limited partnership, whose partners are as follows: 

a. SL Florida LLC, a limited liability company, whose members are Sheila Chess, 

who is domiciled in and a citizen of New York; Sheila Levine Irrevocable Grantor 

Trust, a traditional trust, whose trustee is Jordan Pilevsky, a citizen of New York; 

and Palm Mile Corp., a New York corporation with its principal place of business 

in New York;

Case 1:20-cv-22087-KMW Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/19/2020 Page 1 of 8
2

b. Allen Pilevsky, who is domiciled in and a citizen of New York;

c. Palm Springs Mile GP LLC, a limited liability company, whose members are as 

follows:

i. Philip Pilevsky, who is domiciled in and a citizen of New York;

ii. PP Palm Springs Mile LLC, a limited liability company, whose sole 

member is Philip Pilevsky, who is domiciled in and a citizen of New York;

iii. SIP Palm Springs Mile LLC, a limited liability company, whose members 

are as follows:

a. SIP Hialeah Trust, a traditional trust, whose trustees are 

Michael T. Pilevsky, who is domiciled in and a citizen of 

New York; and Samantha J. Hoffman, who is domiciled in 

and a citizen of New Jersey; and

b. SIP Descendants Hialeah Trust, a traditional trust, whose 

trustee is Seth Pilevsky, who is domiciled in and a citizen of 

New York;

iv. SJH Palm Springs Mile LLC, a limited liability company, whose members 

are as follows:

a. SJH Hialeah Trust, a traditional trust, whose trustees are 

Seth Pilevsky, who is domiciled in and a citizen of New 

York; and Michael Pilevsky, who is domiciled in and a 

citizen of New York; and

Case 1:20-cv-22087-KMW Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/19/2020 Page 2 of 8
3

b. SJH Descendants Hialeah Trust, a traditional trust, whose 

trustee is Samantha Hoffman, who is domiciled in and a 

citizen of New Jersey;

v. MTP Palm Springs Mile LLC, a limited liability company, whose members 

are as follows:

a. MTP Hialeah Trust, a traditional trust, whose trustee is Seth 

Pilevsky, who is domiciled in and a citizen of New York; 

and

b. MTP Descendants Hialeah Trust, a traditional trust, whose 

trustee is Michael Pilevsky, who is domiciled in and a citizen 

of New York;

vi. HSL Palm Springs Mile LLC, a limited liability company, whose members 

are as follows:

a. HSL Hialeah Trust, a traditional trust, whose trustees are 

Michael Pilevsky, who is domiciled in and of New York; and 

Josef Leifer, who is domiciled in and a citizen of New 

Jersey; and

b. HSL Descendants Hialeah Trust, a traditional trust, whose 

trustees are Heidi Leifer, who is domiciled in and a citizen 

of New Jersey; and Josef Leifer, who is domiciled in and a 

citizen of New Jersey;

vii. Corinne Sprung, who is domiciled in and a citizen of New York;

viii. Jordan Pilevsky, who is domiciled in and a citizen of New York;

Case 1:20-cv-22087-KMW Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/19/2020 Page 3 of 8
4

ix. Stephanie Pilevsky, who is domiciled in and a citizen of New York; and

x. Joshua Levine, who is domiciled in and a citizen of New York.

3. Defendant RENT-A-CENTER, INC. (“Defendant” or “Tenant”) is a Delaware

corporation with its principal place of business in Plano, Texas. 

4. This Court has jurisdiction under diversity principles pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§

1332. The matter in controversy exceeds the sum or value of $75,000.00, exclusive of interest and 

costs, and is between citizens of different States. 

5. Venue lies in this District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(2), where a substantial 

part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred, and where the payment being 

sought is due. 

6. This Court has personal jurisdiction under Florida’s long-arm statute, through 

Defendant’s operation of retail stores in this district. Defendant operates, conducts, engages in, 

and carries on a business or business venture in this state or has an office or agency in this state; 

has caused injury to persons or property within this state arising out of an act or omission by the 

Defendant outside this state, while the Defendant was engaged in solicitation or service activities 

within this state; and breached a contract in this state by failing to perform acts required by the 

contract to be performed in this state. Defendant regularly does or solicits business, or engages in 

other persistent courses of conduct, or derives substantial revenue from goods used or consumed 

or services rendered in this state. The activities of Defendant within the state are substantial and 

not isolated. In addition, this action arises out of transactions and operations connected with and 

incidental to Defendant’s business within the state and, specifically, the business relationship 

between Plaintiff and Defendants.

Case 1:20-cv-22087-KMW Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/19/2020 Page 4 of 8
5

GENERAL ALLEGATIONS

7. On or about September 8, 1999, Plaintiff, as Landlord, and Defendant, as Tenant, 

entered into a Lease for the Premises, as defined in the Lease, in the Palm Springs Mile Shopping 

Center located in Hialeah, Florida and owned by the Plaintiff. 

8. Plaintiff references and incorporates the Lease, and the terms as defined therein, as 

Exhibit “1” hereto. 

9. The Lease is for a term of years, expiring on January 31, 2022. The total Rent and 

other charges for the full remaining term of the Lease are in excess of $165,000. 

10. Tenant is currently in possession of the Premises, pursuant to the Lease.

11. Tenant, however, has breached the Lease by failing to pay Rent and other charges 

when due on April 1 and May 1, 2020. Tenant has further advised that its non-payment of Rent 

will continue, because of the circumstances related to COVID-19. 

12. The Landlord recognizes the challenges posed by COVID-19, including on its own 

business. Under the express terms and provisions of the Lease, however, the Tenant is obligated 

to pay Rent and that obligation is not excused. 

13. On or about April 30, 2020, Plaintiff served Defendant with a written notice, a copy 

of which is attached as Exhibit “2” hereto, advising that Tenant was in breach of the Lease based 

on its failure to pay Rent when due, demanding that Rent be paid in full, and expressly reserving 

all of the Landlord’s rights and remedies. 

14. Defendant, as set forth above, failed and refused to pay.

15. Landlord has declared and hereby reasserts the default and declares the full amount 

of the Rents and charges for the remaining term of the Lease to now be due, in excess of $165,000.

Case 1:20-cv-22087-KMW Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/19/2020 Page 5 of 8
6

16. All conditions precedent to the filing of this action have been fulfilled, satisfied, 

waived or excused.

17. This action does not waive the right of Landlord, which is expressly reserved, to 

seek eviction of Tenant, including in a separate legal action.

18. Landlord has retained the law firm of Coffey Burlington, P.L. and is obligated to 

pay the firm a reasonable fee.

COUNT I

ACTION FOR PAST DUE RENTS

19. Plaintiff repeats and re-alleges the allegations contained above as if fully set forth 

herein, and further states as follows:

20. This is an action for damages arising out of Tenant’s breach of the Lease.

21. Plaintiff and Defendant entered into the Lease as alleged above.

22. Tenant failed to pay, when due, certain rents and other charges pursuant to the 

Lease, and is therefore in default of the Lease.

23. Plaintiff made a demand upon the Defendant for payment of the amounts due, but 

despite the demand, Defendant failed to pay. 

24. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant’s breach, Plaintiff has suffered 

damage.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendant for the past-due amounts 

under the Lease, as well as for additional Rent and other charges that may continue to accrue, 

interest, costs, attorneys’ fees (pursuant to Article 26 of the Lease), and such further relief as this 

Court deems just and proper.

Case 1:20-cv-22087-KMW Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/19/2020 Page 6 of 8
7

COUNT II

ACTION FOR ACCELERATED RENTS

25. Plaintiff repeats and re-alleges the allegations contained above as if fully set forth 

herein, and further states as follows:

26. This is an action for damages arising out of Tenant’s breach of the Lease.

27. Plaintiff and Defendant entered into the Lease as alleged above.

28. Tenant failed to pay, when due, certain rents and other charges pursuant to the 

Lease, and is therefore in default of the Lease.

29. Plaintiff made a demand upon the Defendant for payment of the amounts due, but 

despite the demand, Defendant failed to pay the amounts. 

30. Defendant, moreover, has advised that its non-payment of Rent will continue 

because of the circumstances related to COVID-19, which is an anticipatory repudiation and 

breach of its payment obligations under the Leases. 

31. Pursuant to Article 26 and applicable Florida law, based on the Tenant’s default 

and repudiation of its obligations under the Lease, the Landlord is entitled to accelerate the 

Tenant’s obligation to pay the balance of future Rents and other charges for the full remaining 

term of the Lease, which are in excess of $165,000. Landlord has declared and hereby reasserts 

the defaults and declares the full amount of the Rents and other charges for the remaining term of 

the Lease to now be due.1

1 Landlord expressly reserves and in no way waives its rights to terminate the Lease or 

Tenant’s right of possession, or to seek eviction of the Tenant – although those rights are not being 

pursued in this action.

Case 1:20-cv-22087-KMW Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/19/2020 Page 7 of 8
8

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendant for the full amount of 

future Rents and charges under the Lease, plus interest, costs, attorneys’ fees (pursuant to Article 

26 of the Lease), and such further relief as this Court deems just and proper.

Respectfully submitted,

By: /s/ Kevin C. Kaplan

Kevin C. Kaplan, Esq.

Florida Bar No. 933848

kkaplan@coffeyburlington.com

lperez@coffeyburlington.com 

service@coffeyburlington.com

COFFEY BURLINGTON, P.L.

2601 South Bayshore Drive, Penthouse One

Miami, Florida 33133

Telephone: (305) 858-2900

Facsimile: (305) 858-5261

Counsel for Plaintiff

Case 1:20-cv-22087-KMW Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/19/2020 Page 8 of 8