IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

MIAMI DIVISION

Case No. 1:20-cv-23235

LEZER CORP.

a Delaware corporation,

Plaintiff,

v.

NOBLE PARTNERS LLC,

a Maine limited liability company, d/b/a

NOBLE MEDICAL SUPPLY;

SEAN GRADY, an individual,

Defendants.

____________________________________/

COMPLAINT

Plaintiff, LEZER CORP, a Delaware corporation (“Lezer” or “Plaintiff”), by and through 

its undersigned attorneys, hereby sues Defendants, NOBLE PARTNERS LLC, a Maine limited 

liability company d/b/a NOBLE MEDICAL SUPPLY (“Noble”), and SEAN GRADY

(“Grady”), an individual residing in the state of Maine (together, “Defendants”), states and 

alleges as follows:

PARTIES, JURISDICTION, AND VENUE

1. Lezer is a corporation incorporated in the state of Delaware, with a principal place 

of business located at 1151 97th Street, Bay Harbor, Florida 33154. Therefore, Lezer is a citizen 

of Delaware and Florida for purposes of diversity jurisdiction. Lezer is a medical supplies 

distributor that acquires comprehensive quality medical supplies from suppliers and distributes 

them to healthcare businesses around the country.

Case 1:20-cv-23235-RNS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 1 of 15
Page 2 of 15

2. Grady is an individual who resides in the state of Maine at a residence, upon 

information and belief, located at 86 Rockland Ave, Portland ME 04102. Therefore, Grady is a 

citizen of Maine for purposes of diversity jurisdiction. 

3. Noble is a limited liability company organized under Maine law which does 

business under the assumed or fictitious name “Noble Medical Supply” and with a principal 

place of business located at 1148 Forest Ave, Portland, ME 04101. On information and belief, 

Noble’s membership consists of at least Grady, therefore, Noble is a citizen of Maine for 

purposes of diversity jurisdiction. Noble officially holds itself out as a medical supplies supplier 

that conducts business in the state of Florida, including contracting with Lezer for the provision 

of certain medical supplies, which are the subject matter of this Complaint.

4. This Court has diversity jurisdiction over this civil action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §

1332(a)(1) because the matter in controversy exceeds $75,000.00, exclusive of interest and costs, 

and the citizenship of each of the Defendants is diverse from the citizenship of Lezer.

5. This Court has personal jurisdiction over the Defendants, and venue is proper in 

this Court under 28 U.S.C. 1391(b), because the Defendants transact business in the state of 

Florida which is not isolated, including contracting with Lezer for the provision of certain 

medical supplies, which are the subject matter of this Complaint.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

6. In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, around the beginning of May of 2020, 

Grady began negotiating on behalf of Noble with a principal of Lezer to supply Lezer with 

certain 70% Isopropyl Pharma-C-Wipes (the “Alcohol Wipes”). These were to be used to supply 

Lezer’s own customers, all of whom were medical companies desperately trying to locate 

medical supplies to fight the COVID-19 outbreak.

Case 1:20-cv-23235-RNS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 2 of 15
Page 3 of 15

7. Soon thereafter, on May 8, 2020, Noble and Lezer corresponded by phone and email and subsequently entered into an agreement (the “Agreement”), whereby Noble would 

supply Lezer with 216,000 units of the Alcohol Wipes by May 18, 2020. In exchange, Lezer

would pay Noble $432,000, with 25% ($108,000) first due as a deposit (the “Deposit”), with the 

balance due upon delivery of all 216,000 units of the Alcohol Wipes.

8. Pursuant to the Agreement, the Deposit would be returned if Noble did not 

materially fulfill the order as Noble had promised.

9. On May 11, 2020, the next business day after the parties had entered into the 

Agreement, Lezer wired the Deposit of $108,000 to Noble.

10. However, despite Noble’s obligation to deliver the 216,000 units of Alcohol 

Wipes by May 18, 2020, Noble delivered a total of only 14,400 units of Alcohol Wipes, or 

approximately 5% of what was supposed to be delivered pursuant to the Agreement.

11. To be sure, as a distributor, Lezer already had contracts to supply the Alcohol 

Wipes to its own customers. Noble’s delivery of a paltry fraction of its total promised amount 

immediately frustrated Lezer’s agreements with its customers, caused Lezer significant losses as 

these customers canceled their orders and sought these badly needed supplies elsewhere, and 

jeopardized the health of all those affected by COVID-19 who depend on Lezer’s customers (and 

thereby on Lezer).

12. Absolutely shocked at the paucity of the amount delivered, Lezer immediately 

inquired with Grady regarding the status of the remaining nearly 95% of the promised order. 

Grady was not even apologetic, and instead offered Lezer only stall tactics and false promises 

regarding shortly providing delivery.

13. However, with no delivery made more than two weeks later, by June 4, 2020, 

Lezer understood that Noble had no intention of delivering the vast balance of Alcohol Wipes. 

Case 1:20-cv-23235-RNS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 3 of 15
Page 4 of 15

Given the significant losses Lezer had already sustained due to Noble’s failure, Lezer demanded 

that Noble give the Deposit back.

14. However, Noble refused, and still offered only further stall tactics and false 

promises.

15. After communicating back and forth with each other but getting nowhere, Lezer 

tried one last-ditch formal effort to obtain the Deposit back. Lezer sent Grady an official

demand letter on June 10, 2020, a true copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit “A” (the 

“Demand Letter”).

16. However, Grady and Noble ignored the Demand Letter, and failed and refused to 

return the Deposit.

17. Since sending the Demand Letter, Lezer has learned that, nearly a year earlier, on 

June 6, 2019, Grady was indicted in Cumberland County Superior Court in Maine on criminal 

charges of securities fraud, theft by deception, and selling securities without a license. A copy of 

the indictment is attached hereto as Exhibit “B”.

18. Prior to entering into the Agreement, Grady did not disclose to Lezer that he had 

been indicted for fraud.

19. On information and belief, Grady ran Noble and its affiliated business entities as 

mere fronts and alter-egos to advance his criminal fraud enterprise and hide his identity.

20. Lezer appears to be only the latest victim in Grady’s criminal schemes, this time 

focused on capitalizing on the COVID-19 pandemic. Indeed, based on media reports, 

information, and belief, Grady has sought to defraud other panicked, supply-strapped healthcare 

companies out of millions of dollars by promising delivery of significant quantities of critically

needed medical supplies with no intention whatsoever of following through on delivery. All to 

Case 1:20-cv-23235-RNS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 4 of 15
Page 5 of 15

the oftentimes deathly detriment of the infected patients who are depending on these supplies to 

reach their medical providers.

21. The Deposit of $108,000 is still wrongfully retained by Noble and/or Grady as of

today.

22. On June 25, 2016, Plaintiff served Defendants with a statutory Civil Theft Notice 

pursuant to Florida Statute § 772.11 (the “Civil Theft Letter”), demanding that the Defendants 

repay the monies improperly retained by the Defendants, a true copy of which is hereto as 

composite Exhibit “C”.

23. To date, both Grady and Noble have ignored the Civil Theft Letter, and failed and 

refused to return the Deposit.

24. All conditions precedent to the filing of this action have been performed, have 

occurred, have been waived, or have otherwise been excused or would be futile.

COUNT I

BREACH OF CONTRACT

(Against Noble)

25. Lezer realleges and incorporates by reference herein the allegations of paragraphs 

1 through 24 as if fully rewritten herein.

26. For good and sufficient consideration, Lezer entered into the Agreement with 

Noble, wherein the parties agreed that Lezer initially would provide the Deposit and pay the 

balance of the purchase price upon delivery of the 216,000 units of Alcohol Wipes. In exchange, 

Noble agreed to provide full and timely delivery of the 216,000 units of Alcohol Wipes, and if 

not, to timely return the Deposit. The Agreement is a valid and enforceable contract.

27. Lezer fully performed by timely providing the Deposit to Noble.

28. However, Noble materially breached the Agreement by failing to deliver all 

216,000 Alcohol Wipes, instead delivering y 14,400 (or about 5%) of them.

Case 1:20-cv-23235-RNS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 5 of 15
Page 6 of 15

29. Noble further materially breached by failing to return the Deposit back to Lezer

after demand, despite Noble’s agreement to do so if it did not perform its obligations under the 

Agreement.

30. Even after Lezer sent the Demand Letter, Noble still has not delivered the 

promised Alcohol Wipes, nor has it returned the Deposit.

31. Noble’s breach of contract has caused damage to Lezer in the form of a yet-to-be 

specified amount of lost profits with its customers who were counting on Lezer’s delivery of the 

Alcohol Wipes for its own patients, and specifically the $108,000 Deposit.

32. Therefore, Noble is liable to Lezer for breach of the Agreement.

WHEREFORE, Lezer requests an entry of judgment in its favor against Noble on Count 

I – Breach of Contract, awarding the following relief:

a) an award of compensatory damages against Noble in an amount to be determined, in 

addition to all applicable interest and attorneys’ fees and other legal costs;

b) punitive damages; and

c) any such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and equitable.

COUNT II

CONVERSION

(Against Noble and Grady)

33. Lezer realleges and incorporates by reference herein the allegations of paragraphs 

1 through 24 as if fully rewritten herein.

34. This is an action for conversion against Noble and Grady to recover the Deposit 

owed to Lezer.

35. Given that Noble did not fulfill its end of the Agreement when it failed to deliver 

the 216,000 Alcohol Wipes it had promised, Lezer has full ownership rights in the Deposit or a 

right to possession of it.

Case 1:20-cv-23235-RNS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 6 of 15
Page 7 of 15

36. Noble and Grady have effectively stolen the Deposit and wrongfully assert an act 

of dominion and control over the Deposit.

37. Despite demand, Noble and Grady have failed and refused to return the Deposit to 

Lezer.

38. Noble’s refusal to return the Deposit despite the Demand Letter’s request for the 

same constitutes a wrongful act by Noble, inconsistent with Lezer’s property rights in the 

Deposit.

39. Noble and Grady’s unlawful and unauthorized acts have permanently deprived 

Lezer of its ownership in the Deposit. 

40. As a result of Noble and Grady’s actions, Lezer has suffered damages in the 

amount of $108,000 due to Noble’s refusal to return the Deposit.

41. Therefore, Noble is liable to Lezer for Conversion.

WHEREFORE, Lezer requests an entry of judgment in its favor against Noble and/or 

Grady on Count II – Conversion, awarding the following relief:

a) an award of compensatory damages against Noble in an amount of $108,000, in 

addition to all applicable interest and attorneys’ fees and other legal costs; 

b) punitive damages; and

c) any such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and equitable.

COUNT III

FRAUD

(Against Noble and Grady)

42. Lezer realleges and incorporates by reference herein the allegations of paragraphs 

1 through 24 as if fully rewritten herein.

43. Grady made a false statement of material fact when he promised Lezer that Noble 

would deliver the 216,000 units of Alcohol Wipes pursuant to the Agreement.

Case 1:20-cv-23235-RNS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 7 of 15
Page 8 of 15

44. Grady knew that this statement was untrue at the time he said it, as he was 

advancing a criminal enterprise, described above, and had no intention of delivering the 216,000 

Alcohol Wipes pursuant to the Agreement.

45. When Grady stated that Noble would deliver the 216,000 Alcohol Wipes to Lezer, 

Grady’s intention was actually to dupe Lezer into giving him and/or Noble the Deposit.

46. Presuming Grady and Noble were honest, and without any indication to the 

contrary, Lezer justifiably had confidence in the veracity of Grady’s false statement that Noble 

would deliver the 216,000 Alcohol Wipes pursuant to the Agreement.

47. Additionally, Grady failed to disclose the material fact that he had been indicted 

on criminal fraud claims nearly a year prior to entering into the Agreement with Lezer.

48. Grady knew or should have known that the material fact of his indictment should 

be disclosed to Lezer before the parties entered into the Agreement.

49. Grady further knew that his failure to disclose this material fact would induce 

Lezer to act by entering into the Agreement generally and giving over the Deposit specifically, 

incorrectly thinking that there was no reason to suspect that Noble and Grady were dishonest.

50. Grady had a duty to disclose that he had been indicted on fraud charges to Lezer

prior to entering into the Agreement.

51. Grady’s failure to disclose that he had been indicted left Lezer with the 

inaccurate presumption that Grady personally and Noble generally could be trusted, and Lezer 

detrimentally relied on this misinformation when it chose to enter into the Agreement generally 

and give over the Deposit specifically.

52. As a result of each of: (i) Grady’s false statement of one material fact, and (ii) his 

failure to disclose another material fact, Lezer was damaged in the amount of the Deposit, 

$108,000. 

Case 1:20-cv-23235-RNS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 8 of 15
Page 9 of 15

53. Therefore, Noble and/or Grady are liable to Lezer for fraud.

WHEREFORE, Lezer requests an entry of judgment in its favor against Noble and/or 

Grady on Count III – Fraud, awarding the following relief:

a. an award of compensatory damages against Noble in an amount of $108,000, in 

addition to all applicable interest and attorneys’ fees and other legal costs; 

b. punitive damages; and

c. any such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and equitable.

COUNT IV

UNJUST ENRICHMENT

(Against Noble and Grady)

54. Lezer realleges and incorporates by reference herein the allegations of paragraphs 

1 through 24 as if fully rewritten herein.

55. Should for any reason it be determined that the Agreement is not an enforceable 

contract, in the alternative, Lezer argues the following:

56. Noble and/or Grady received all or portions of the Deposit under circumstances 

which require Defendants to return to Lezer the amounts they received.

57. Pursuant to the Agreement, Lezer conferred a benefit onto Noble and/or Grady in 

the form of providing the $108,000 Deposit.

58. Noble and/or Grady knowingly and voluntarily accepted, took possession of and 

retained the Deposit.

59. Noble and/or Grady each knowingly and voluntary accepted and retained the 

monetary benefits conferred by the Deposit.

60. Given Noble’s and/or Grady’s underlying intent to defraud Lezer, and definitely 

not to honor the commitments of the Agreement, such acceptance and retention violates the 

fundamental principles of justice, equity, and good conscience.

Case 1:20-cv-23235-RNS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 9 of 15
Page 10 of 15

61. Therefore, Noble and Grady have been unjustly enriched.

62. As a result of Defendants’ actions, Lezer has suffered damages. 

WHEREFORE, Lezer requests an entry of judgment in its favor against Noble and/or 

Grady on Count IV – Unjust Enrichment, awarding the following relief:

a. an award of compensatory damages against Noble in an amount of $108,000, in 

addition to all applicable interest and attorneys’ fees and other legal costs; 

b. punitive damages; and

c. any such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and equitable.

COUNT V

PIERCING THE CORPORATE VEIL

(Against Noble and Grady)

63. Lezer realleges and incorporates by reference herein the allegations of paragraphs 

1 through 24 as if fully rewritten herein.

64. On information and belief, Grady operated and otherwise treated Noble as an alter 

ego and/or mere instrumentality in committing the fraud described herein. Thus, Lezer is entitled 

to pierce the corporate veil of Noble to reach the assets of Grady.

65. For all purposes, Noble and Grady were single economic entities. Grady is the 

purported owner and controlled of Noble. 

66. Specifically, Noble is not separate in any way from Grady. Indeed, Grady 

established Noble solely to thinly mask his personal criminal history of fraud and his current 

fraudulent activities in order to dupe healthcare companies into paying him for badly needed 

medical supplies to fight the COVID-19 pandemic, without any intention to make his promised 

deliveries. In essence, Grady dominated and controlled Noble to such an extent that Noble’s 

ostensible independent existence was in reality nonexistent, and Grady was in fact the alter ego 

of Noble.

Case 1:20-cv-23235-RNS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 10 of 15
Page 11 of 15

67. On information and belief, Grady disregarded the corporate formalities of Noble.

68. Grady improperly and deliberately used Noble as a mere sham to advance his 

criminal enterprise and defraud Noble’s “customers”.

69. This improper use of Noble was the proximate cause of Lezer’s loss of the 

Deposit and all of Lezer’s lost profits with its customers who were depending on the Alcohol 

Wipes that Grady had no intention of causing Noble to deliver.

70. Therefore, the corporate veil of Noble should be pierced to reach Grady’s 

personal assets.

WHEREFORE, Lezer requests an entry of judgment in its favor against Noble and 

Grady on Count V – Pierce the Corporate Veil, ruling that:

a. Grady is the alter-ego of Noble;

b. compensatory damages in amount to be determined later;

c. statutory interest and reasonable attorney fees and other legal costs;

d. punitive damages;

e. and any such other and further relief as this Court may deem just and equitable.

COUNT VI

CIVIL CONSPIRACY

(against Noble and Grady)

71. Lezer realleges and incorporates by reference herein the allegations of paragraphs 

1 through 24 as if fully rewritten herein.

72. By the conduct described herein, Noble and Grady have combined and conspired 

among themselves and other known conspirators for the purpose of willfully and maliciously 

injuring Plaintiff.

73. Noble and Grady agreed and conspired amongst themselves to convert Lezer’s

funds for their own benefit without any authority or authorization from Lezer.

Case 1:20-cv-23235-RNS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 11 of 15
Page 12 of 15

74. Noble and Grady both knew of and participated in the theft and conversion of 

Lezer’s property by retaining the Deposit and, upon belief, utilizing the funds for their own 

personal benefit.

75. As a direct and proximate result, Lezer has been damaged.

WHEREFORE, for the reasons set forth above, Lezer demands judgment against Noble and 

Grady in an amount to be determined at trial, plus interest thereon, attorneys’ fees and costs, and 

such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.

COUNT VII

CONSTRUCTIVE TRUST

(against Noble and Grady)

76. Plaintiff adopts and realleges each and every allegation contained in Paragraphs 1 

through 24 above as if specifically set forth herein.

77. Should for any reason it be determined that the Agreement is not an enforceable 

contract, in the alternative, Lezer argues the following:

78. This is an action in equity against Noble and Grady to recover the proceeds of the 

Deposit owed to Lezer.

119. Defendants have acquired possession of the funds from the Deposit through fraud, 

as more particularly described above.

120. Defendants have engaged in the type of conduct which warrants the imposition of 

a constructive trust on any funds which remain in the Defendants’ possession from the 

Defendants’ wrongful retention of the Deposit.

121. Defendants’ continued possession or retention of any funds derived from the 

Deposit is against equity as they have no right or title to said funds.

122. Defendants’ continued possession or retention of any funds derived from the 

Deposit continue to unjustly enrich the Defendants.

Case 1:20-cv-23235-RNS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 12 of 15
Page 13 of 15

123. Equity also warrants the imposition of a constructive trust on any property which 

was purchased only as a consequence of having the funds received from the Deposit and which 

was transferred to the Defendants or any third-party transferor in an attempt to hide the funds 

from Plaintiff.

WHEREFORE, for the reasons set forth above, Plaintiff requests that all the bank 

accounts and assets of Noble and Grady, including any property purchased using proceeds from 

the Deposit, be held in a constructive trust for the Plaintiff, to the extent of the funds taken by the 

Defendants and to the extent of any benefit conferred on any of the individual Defendants 

pursuant to the theft, conversion and civil conspiracy to commit conversion made in this 

Complaint, and such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.

COUNT VIII

CIVIL THEFT – FLA. STAT. § 772.11

(against Noble and Grady)

124. Plaintiff adopts and realleges each and every allegation contained in Paragraphs 1 

through 24 above as if specifically set forth herein.

125. This is an action for relief against Noble and Grady pursuant to the provisions of 

Fla. Stat. § 772.11.

126. The Defendants unlawfully and knowingly obtained or used (as defined by Fla 

Stat. § 812.014(1)(a) and (b)) the property of Plaintiff (e.g., the Deposit) with the intent to 

permanently or temporarily deprive the Plaintiff of such money in violation of Fla. Stat. § 

812.014(1)(a).

127. The Defendants unlawfully and knowingly obtained or used (as defined by Fla 

Stat. § 812.014(1)(a) and (b)) the property of Plaintiff (e.g., the Deposit) with the intent to 

permanently or temporarily appropriate the money for their own use, in violation of Fla. Stat. § 

812.014(1)(b).

Case 1:20-cv-23235-RNS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 13 of 15
Page 14 of 15

128. The Defendants did not earn the proceeds of the Deposit.

129. The facts alleged herein demonstrate that the Plaintiff has a clear legal right to 

recovery based on the merits of its claim that Defendants violated Fla. Stat. § 812.014

130. Pursuant to Fla. Stat. § 772.11, Plaintiff made written demand to Defendants for 

treble damages. See Exhibit “C”.

131. To date, Defendants have not complied with the written demand within thirty (30) 

days after receipt of the Civil Theft Letter, as required by statute.

132. The Defendants’ actions in failing to account for and deliver treble the balance of 

the Deposit constitutes civil theft.

133. As a direct and proximate result of the Defendants’ civil theft of the Deposit,

Plaintiff has suffered substantial damages and is entitled to have such damages trebled pursuant 

to Fla. Stat. § 772.11.

WHEREFORE, for the reasons set forth above, Plaintiff demand judgment against 

Defendants, Noble and Grady, for compensatory damages, an award of treble damages for an 

amount to be proved at trial, plus prejudgment interest, reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs 

pursuant to Fla. Stat. § 772.11, and such other and further relief as the Court deems just and 

proper.

Dated: August 4, 2020 Respectfully submitted,

READ LAW PLLC

25 SE 2nd Avenue, Eighth Floor

Miami, Florida 33131

Phone: (305) 209-2131

asr@alexisreadlaw.com

By: /s/ Alexis S. Read

Alexis S. Read, Esq.

Fla. Bar No. 98084

Case 1:20-cv-23235-RNS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 14 of 15
Page 15 of 15

/s/ Aharon S. Kaye

Aharon S. Kaye

Il. Bar No. 6291684

Noah Siegel

Il. Bar No. 6327603

GUTNICKI LLP

Pro Hac Vice Admission Pending

4711 Golf Road, Suite 200

Skokie, Illinois 60076

Telephone: (847) 745-6594

akaye@gutnicki.com

nsiegel@gutnicki.com

Attorneys for Lezer Corp

Case 1:20-cv-23235-RNS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2020 Page 15 of 15