1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Case No. 1:21-mc-23103-BLOOM/Otazo-Reyes

CASA EXPRESS CORP, as Trustee of

CASA EXPRESS TRUST,

Judgment Creditor,

v.

BOLIVARIAN REPUBLIC OF 

VENEZUELA,

Judgment Debtor.

/

EX PARTE EMERGENCY MOTION TO IMPLEAD THIRD PARTIES FISHER ISL. 

7043, LLC AND COLLINS APT. 4401, LLC, TO THIS SUPPLEMENTARY 

PROCEEDING AND FOR ISSUANCE OF STATUTORY NOTICES TO APPEAR

Judgment Creditor Casa Express Corp, as Trustee of Casa Express Trust (“Casa Express”), 

moves to implead third parties Fisher Isl. 7043, LLC and Collins Apt. 4401, LLC (collectively, the 

“Caballero Entities”) to this supplementary proceeding and for the issuance of statutory Notices to

Appear pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 69(a), Florida Statute § 56.29, and Southern 

District of Florida Local Rule 7.1(d)(1). 

EMERGENCY RELIEF

Non-Party Antonio Caballero (“Caballero”) has obtained title to two Venezuelan properties 

through the Caballero Entities in a parallel post-judgment proceeding pending in front of Judge 

Moore without providing any notice of the sale or the proceeding to Casa Express1: The Fisher 

1 In the interests of judicial economy, Casa Express refers this Court to Magistrate Judge 

Becerra’s Report and Recommendation for a thorough procedural background on Caballero’s 

sealed collection efforts against Raul Gorrin Belisario (“Gorrin”) and his controlled entities that 

began on April 8, 2022, nearly seven months after Casa Express moved to commence 

supplementary proceedings against the same parties. See Caballero v. FARC, Case No. 1:18-cv25337-KMM (S.D. Fla. December 10, 2022), [ECF No. 202] at § I.

Case 1:21-cv-23103-BB Document 122 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/19/2023 Page 1 of 11
2

Island Property2 and the Collins Avenue Property3. Casa Express submits that the Caballero 

Entities took title subject to the claims asserted herein because they had actual, inquiry, or 

constructive notice of this litigation. 

Caballero has also levied other Venezuelan properties that are the subject of this action. At 

this time, the Caballero Entities and Caballero have been enjoined from “dissipating, conveying, 

encumbering, or otherwise transferring ownership” of the Fisher Island Property and the Collins 

Avenue Property, and from selling any levied properties linked to Gorrin pending adjudication of 

a motion to vacate that seeks to set aside the judicial sale of the Fisher Island Property and the 

Collins Avenue Property. See Caballero v. FARC, Case No. 1:18-cv-25337-KMM (S.D. Fla. 

January 15, 2023), [ECF No. 214].

The motion to vacate is fully briefed. Casa Express cannot speculate how long it will take 

Judge Moore to issue a ruling on the motion. But if the motion is denied, Caballero will be able to 

transfer or sell Venezuelan properties to a bona fide third party purchaser extinguishing Casa 

Express’s claims to the properties. For these reasons, Casa Express respectfully requests 

emergency relief by date certain – January 26, 2023 (7 days after filing) to promptly implead the 

Caballero Entities into this proceeding. 

MEMORANDUM OF LAW

Under Florida law, a purchaser acquires title to a property subject to the outcome in a 

litigation if he or she takes title with actual or constructive notice of the litigation. See Montgomery

2 “The Fisher Island Property” refers to the Venezuelan property located at 7043 Fisher 

Island Dr., Unit 7043, Fisher Island, Florida. Impleaded Defendant Planet 2 Reaching, Inc. held 

title to this property through November 8, 2022. 

3 “The Collins Avenue Property” refers to the Venezuelan property located at 18555 Collins 

Avenue, Unit 4401, Sunny lsles Beach, Florida 33160. Impleaded Defendant Posh 8 Dynamic, 

Inc. held title to this property through November 8, 2022. 

Case 1:21-cv-23103-BB Document 122 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/19/2023 Page 2 of 11
3

Ward Dev. Corp. v. Juster, 932 F.2d 1378, 1384 (11th Cir. 1991)(explaining that “actual or

constructive notice of the pending suit on the part of the interested party may substitute for

recorded lis pendens”) (applying Florida law); see also McAlister v. Salas, 485 So. 2d 1333, 1335

(Fla. 2d DCA 1986) (“[I]n the absence of a recorded lis pendens, if the third party purchaser takes

title to property with awareness of a prior interest, evidenced here by the pending litigation, such

notice bars the third party's claim to the property”); Westburne Supply, Inc. v. Cmty. Villas

Partners, Ltd., 508 So. 2d 431, 434 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987) (holding that “filing a notice of lis pendens 

is not essential to enforcement of a lien against a purchaser with knowledge of the pending 

litigation”).

In addition, there is a rebuttable presumption of notice of an unrecorded claim to the 

property when the “party has received information, or has knowledge of such facts sufficient to 

put him on an inquiry.” Harkless v. Laubhan, 278 So. 3d 728, 733 (Fla. 2d DCA 2019) (quoting 

Sapp v. Warner, 105 Fla. 245, 141 So. 124, 129 (1932)). “The party may rebut the presumption by 

proving that he made an inquiry and did prosecute it with all the care and diligence required of a 

reasonably prudent man and still failed to discover the existence of, or to obtain knowledge of, any 

conflicting claim, interest, or right in the property.” Id. (cleaned up; internal quotations omitted). 

But if the party fails “to make any inquiry or to prosecute one with due diligence to the end, the 

presumption remains operative, and the conclusion of a notice is absolute.” Id. at 34 (internal 

quotations omitted). 

In this case, Caballero’s counsel and the registered agent of the Caballero Entities, Leon 

N. Patricios, executed an affidavit prior to the sale of the Venezuelan properties pursuant to § 

56.27(4), Fla. Stat. attesting that he reviewed the Official Records of the Miami-Dade County 

Case 1:21-cv-23103-BB Document 122 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/19/2023 Page 3 of 11
4

Clerk of Court and discovered, among other things, a Notice of Lis Pendens on the Fisher Island 

Property filed by its condominium association:

Notice of Lis Pendens (regarding relief sought as to the Subject 

Property to foreclose a claim of lien) of PALAZZO DEL 

SOL/DELLA LUNA AT FISHER ISLAND CONDOMINIUM 

ASSOCIATION, INC. . . .

Ex. A, Affidavit of L. Patricios at ¶ 9(a)(iii). The Notice of Lis Pendens lists Casa Express as a 

defendant in a foreclosure action filed by the association pending in the Eleventh Circuit Court for 

Miami-Dade County:

Ex. B, Notice of Lis Pendens filed by condominium association. 

The affidavit reveals that Mr. Patricios reviewed the docket of the foreclosure action and 

discovered that the condominium association retained new counsel after the Lis Pendens was 

recorded. Ex. A, at ¶ 9(a)(iii) (explaining that the condominium substituted counsel pursuant to a 

Stipulation citing to the court docket “PALAZZO DEL SOL/DELLA LUNA AT FISHER 

ISLAND CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC VS PLANET 2 REACHING, INC ET AL, 

Case 1:21-cv-23103-BB Document 122 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/19/2023 Page 4 of 11
5

Case No. 2022-004165-CA-01 (Fla. 11th Jud. Cir. Ct., Miami-Dade Cnty. May 17, 2022), Doc. 

No. 34”). 

The docket entry directly below the Stipulation that Mr. Patricios cites in his affidavit 

reflects the issuance of a summons to Casa Express—the only4 defendant in the foreclosure 

action other than the former title holder, Planet 2 Reaching, Inc.:

These facts placed Mr. Patricios on inquiry notice that Casa Express had a potential claim 

to the Fisher Island Property. Flanigan's Enterprises, Inc. v. Shoppes at 18th & Com., Inc., 954 

So. 2d 758, 764 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007) (“If a person has information that would lead a reasonable 

man to make further inquiry for his own protection, but fails to further investigate and learn what 

the inquiry would reasonably have uncovered, the person ‘must suffer the consequence of his 

neglect.’”) (quoting Chatlos v. McPherson, 95 So.2d 506, 509 (Fla.1957)); see also Harkless, 278 

So. 3d at 734 (“A person has no right to shut his eyes or ears to avoid information, and then say 

that he has no notice. It will not suffice the law to remain willfully ignorant of a thing readily

ascertainable by whatever party puts him on inquiry when the means of knowledge is at hand”) 

(cleaned up; quotations omitted). 

4 The condominium association dropped the U.S. Department of the Treasury, Office of 

Foreign Assets Control as a defendant before the affidavit was executed. 

Case 1:21-cv-23103-BB Document 122 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/19/2023 Page 5 of 11
6

Here, at a minimum, Mr. Patricios had a duty to review the operative complaint of the 

foreclosure action to determine why Casa Express was named as a defendant. The Amended 

Complaint (filed prior to the Stipulation) alleges that Casa Express is a subordinate lien holder that 

seeks to attach the Fisher Island Property to satisfy its judgment against the Bolivarian Republic 

of Venezuela, identifying this supplementary proceeding by Case Number:

4. Defendant CASA EXPRESS is named in this action as an 

subordinate lien holder as it appears in the Plaintiff’s Title Search 

Report as an interested party to the Subject Property. Specifically, 

CASA EXPRESS has claimed an interest to the Subject Property by 

virtue of that Statutory Notice to Appear dated September 16, 2021, 

issued by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of 

Florida in Case No. 21-MC-23103-BB (to domesticate and enforce 

the foreign judgment entered by the US District Court for the 

Southern District of New York in Case No.: 18-civ-11940) against 

Defendant PLANET 2 REACHING, giving notice to Defendant 

PLANET 2 REACHING of CASA EXPRESS’S intent to attach the 

subject property to satisfy the judgment against the Bolivarian 

Republic of Venezuela. . . .

17. Specifically, the Defendant CASA EXPRESS may have an 

interest to the Subject Property by virtue of its Statutory Notice to 

Appear dated September 16, 2021, issued by the U.S. District 

Court for the Southern District of Florida, Case No. 21-MC23103-BB (to domesticate and enforce the foreign judgment entered 

by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York in 

Case No. 18-CIV-11940, by application of CASA EXPRESS 

GROUP (as judgment creditor), to PLANET 2 REACHING and 

giving notice of CASA EXPRESS GROUP’S intent to attach the 

subject property to satisfy its judgment against the Bolivarian 

Republic of Venezuela.

Ex. C, Amended Complaint at ¶¶ 4, 17 (emphasis added). 

Alternatively, Mr. Patricios could have reasonably conducted a record search of Casa 

Express in the Miami-Dade County Clerk of Court website. That search would have revealed the 

registered final judgment that is the subject of this action. See Exhibit D, Certified Copy of 

Case 1:21-cv-23103-BB Document 122 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/19/2023 Page 6 of 11
7

Recorded Registered Judgment, County Recorder’s Official Records, Clerk’s File Number 2022 

R 0241655, March 25, 2022. 

Under either scenario, Mr. Patricios would have learned of the existence of this 

supplementary proceeding by reasonably inquiring the circumstances. Therefore, Casa Express 

submits that the Caballero Entities had notice of this supplementary proceeding and took title 

subject to the outcome of this litigation. McAlister, 485 So. 2d at 1335 (“[I]f the third party

purchaser takes title to property with awareness of a prior interest, evidenced here by the pending

litigation, such notice bars the third party's claim to the property”).

Tellingly, Caballero repeatedly asked the court to maintain his collection efforts under seal 

to prevent other judgment creditors (i.e., Casa Express) from executing the Venezuelan properties 

before him:

Furthermore, because other judgment creditors may attempt to 

execute against the blocked real properties subject to this 

Motion (as well as the other blocked real properties identified by 

Caballero on Exhibit 3 of the A/I Motion [D.E. 151-3]), Caballero 

respectfully requests that this Court maintain this ex parte Motion

(inclusive of exhibits and proposed forms), as well as the ex parte 

A/I Motion [D.E. 150] (inclusive of exhibits and proposed forms) 

and the A/I Order [D.E. 151], under seal until Caballero has attached 

all the blocked real properties listed on Exhibit 3 of the A/I Motion

[D.E. 151-3] (with the exception of the second listed real property).

Caballero, [ECF No. 155] at ¶ 34 (emphasis added); id. [ECF No. 158] at ¶ 28 (same). Because 

he knew that Casa Express had asserted claims against the Venezuelan properties nearly 7 months 

before he began his collection efforts against the properties. 

Caballero violated Local Rule 3.8 by failing to advise Judge Moore of this related or similar 

action when he initiated his post-judgment efforts against Gorrin and his related entities. See S.D. 

Fla. L. R. 3.8 (“It shall be the continuing duty of the attorneys of record in every action or 

proceeding to bring promptly to the attention of the Court and opposing counsel the existence of . 

Case 1:21-cv-23103-BB Document 122 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/19/2023 Page 7 of 11
8

. . any similar actions or proceedings then pending before another court or administrative 

agency.”). Likewise, Gorrin’s counsel violated Local Rule 3.8 by failing to advise this Court, 

undersigned counsel, and Judge Moore that it was contemporaneously defending two postjudgment actions regarding the same realty in this District. And as a result, the Caballero Entities 

obtained title to the two most valuable Venezuelan properties for pennies on the dollar. 

Specifically, Collins Apt. 4401, LLC purchased the Collins Avenue Property (a penthouse 

at the Porsche Tower) for a mere $10,000 credit bid when its approximate fair market value is $14 

million dollars. Ex. E. Fisher Isl. 7043, LLC also purchased the Fisher Island Property (a penthouse 

in the most luxurious condominium within the island) at a significant discount paying a $10 million 

dollar credit bid when its approximate fair market value is $28 million dollars. Ex. F. 

The Court should implead the Caballero Entities to this proceeding to avoid additional 

Venezuelan properties from being sold for pennies on the dollar. 

A. Casa Express has satisfied the requirements to implead the Caballero Entities to this 

supplementary proceeding. 

Under Rule 69 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, supplementary proceedings “must 

accord with the procedure of the state where the court is located . . . .” Fed. R. Civ. P. 69(a)(1). In 

Florida, the procedure for supplementary proceedings is governed by Fla. Stat. § 56.29. Subsection 

(1) of Fla. Stat. § 56.29 provides that:

[w]hen any judgment creditor holds an unsatisfied judgment or

judgment lien obtained under chapter 55, the judgment creditor may

file a motion and an affidavit so stating, identifying, if applicable,

the issuing court, the case number, and the unsatisfied amount of the

judgment or judgment lien, including accrued costs and interest, and

stating that the execution is valid and outstanding, and thereupon the

judgment creditor is entitled to these proceedings supplementary to

execution.

Case 1:21-cv-23103-BB Document 122 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/19/2023 Page 8 of 11
9

§ 56.29(1), Fla. Stat. A party bringing a proceeding supplementary to execution must 1) show that 

he or she possesses an unsatisfied judgment; and 2) file an affidavit averring that the judgment is 

valid and unsatisfied. See id.; B&I Contractors, Inc. v. Mel Re Const. Mgmt., 66 So. 3d 1035, 1037 

(Fla. 2d DCA 2011). 

Section 56.29(2) governs the procedure for impleading third parties. Longo v. Associated 

Limousine Servs., Inc., 236 So. 3d 1115, 1119 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018). It provides:

The judgment creditor shall, in the motion described in subsection

(1) or in a supplemental affidavit, describe any property of the

judgment debtor not exempt from execution in the hands of any

person or any property, debt, or other obligation due to the judgment

debtor which may be applied toward the satisfaction of the

judgment.

§ 56.29(2), Fla. Stat. Compliance with these prerequisites provides the predicate for impleading 

any named third parties to the supplementary proceedings. MCI Telecommunications Corporation 

v. O'Brien Marketing, Inc., 913 F.Supp. 1536, 1540 (S.D. Fla. 1995). “No other showing is 

required to implead the third party.” Morningstar Healthcare, L.L.C. v. Greystone & Co., No. 

8:05-CV-949-T-MAP, 2008 WL 1897590, at *1 (M.D. Fla. Apr. 28, 2008) (internal citation 

omitted). 

Here, Casa Express has satisfied both requirements and the Court has commenced 

supplementary proceedings.5 See [ECF No. 62] (granting motion to commence supplementary 

proceedings because Casa Express “compli[ed] with the statutory prerequisites prescribed by Fla. 

Stat. 56.29(1)”). In addition, Casa Express filed an accompanying affidavit from its president 

attesting that its judgment [ECF No. 1] remains valid and unsatisfied. See Ex. G. Therefore, the 

5 Casa Express hereby adopts and reincorporates all of the arguments and evidence 

(inclusive of exhibits) asserted in the Amended Ex Parte Expedited Motion to Commence 

Proceedings Supplementary [ECF No. 60] (the “Amended Motion”) that establish that the 

properties held by the Gorrin Entities were purchased with misappropriated Venezuelan funds.

Case 1:21-cv-23103-BB Document 122 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/19/2023 Page 9 of 11
10

Court should issue the proposed statutory notices to appear in the form proposed by (Ex. H) to 

Fisher Isl. 7043, LLC and in the form proposed by (Ex. I) to Collins Apt. 4401, LLC to implead 

them into this proceeding. 

WHEREFORE, Casa Express Corp., as Trustee of Casa Express Trust, respectfully 

requests emergency review and relief and that the Court enter an Order granting this Motion in the 

form proposed by (Ex. J):

a) determining that Fisher Isl. 7043, LLC, and Collins Apt. 4401, LLC possessed actual, 

inquiry or constructive notice of this litigation prior to acquiring title to the Fisher Island 

Property and the Collins Avenue Property;

b) determining that Fisher Isl. 7043, LLC, and Collins Apt. 4401, LLC obtained title to the 

Fisher Island Property and the Collins Avenue Property subject to the outcome of this 

litigation;

c) issuing the proposed Notices to Appear directing Fisher Isl. 7043, LLC, and Collins Apt. 

4401, LLC to respond to this Motion within seven (7) business days of service of the Order 

stating why the real properties should not be applied to satisfy the judgment; and 

d) taxing attorneys’ fees and costs in relation to this proceeding to the Judgment Debtor, the 

Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, pursuant to § 56.29(8), Fla. Stat. 

Dated: January 19, 2023 Respectfully submitted,

GAMARDO, P.A.

1200 Brickell Avenue, Suite 750

Miami, Florida 33131

Tel: (305)542-6626

/s/ Andres Gamardo

Andres Gamardo, Esq. 

Florida Bar No.: 1021165

Email: agamardo@gamardolaw.com

Attorney for Plaintiff

Case 1:21-cv-23103-BB Document 122 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/19/2023 Page 10 of 11
11

Local Rule 7.1(a)(3) Certification

Southern District of Florida Local Rule 7.1(a)(3) is inapplicable at this time. 

EMERGENCY CERTIFICATION

After reviewing the facts and researching applicable legal principles, I certify that this 

motion in fact presents a true emergency (as opposed to a matter that may only need expedited 

treatment) and requires an immediate ruling because the Court may not be able to provide 

meaningful relief to a critical, non-routine issue after the expiration of seven days. I understand 

that an unwarranted certification may lead to sanctions. 

By: /s/ Andres Gamardo

 Andres Gamardo, Esq.

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on January 19, 2023, I authorized the electronic filing of the foregoing 

with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system. 

By: /s/ Andres Gamardo

 Andres Gamardo, Esq.

Case 1:21-cv-23103-BB Document 122 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/19/2023 Page 11 of 11