N ovember23,2022

Jam esH.Brady

2422AppleRidgeCircle

M anasquan,NJ 08736

Hon.JudgeDonaldM .M iddlebrooks

PaulG.RogersFederalBuilding andU .S.Courthouse

701Clem atisStreet

Room 257

W estPalm Beach,Florida33401

Re:IndexN o.9:22-cv-81780PresidentD onaldl Trump M Letitia-lames

D earJudgeM iddlebrookg:

1havea1otofinform ationthatwillbeveryhelpf'ultothisCotu't.Pleasem akesurethis

friendofthecom-tletterisputonthedocketsheet.

FirstitshouldbejoiqtedouttothisCourtthatcurrentlynojudge,includingJudge

Engoron,haseverdonéan analysisoftheSeptém ber21,2022 ComplaintfiledbyLetitia

JamesagainsttheTrump'sandtheTrtlmp organization.A sam atteroflaw,itwaswrong

andtmconstitutionalforJudgeArthlzrEngorontogeezetheTlalmpAssetsonN ovember

3,2022 withouttirsteverdoing any ofthefotmdationaltestsneededtodeterm ineifthe

fraud chargesinM s.Jam es'sSeptember21,2022 Complaintweresupported.

Thereason theneededtestswerenotm entionedoraddressedintheSeptember21,2022

ComplaintisbecauseM s.Jam esknew hergaudclaim swùuldnotpassthe5prongtest

requiredforavalidgaudclaim .

M

Thefivepronggaudtestwasalsonever performed byJudgeEngoron becauseheklzew

theSeptember21,2022gaud Complaintwashopelessly flaw edbecausewouldnotpass

anyofthefivefactualallegationsneededforacauseofactionforfraud.

now,theCourtm ustreadtheComplainttiledby

determ inewhetheritwastrue,astheTnlmp'sclaim ,

Complaintwasinfactactuallynothingmorethan

oftheComplaintbeforeit

M s.Jameson September21,2022to

thattheSeptem ber21,2022

a ase N

FILEDBy IM o.c.

82?282222

CALNGELA E. NOBLE

ERKU S Dlsl cl

s.D.o!nIckA.-w.F!B.

1

In'orderfortlzisCourttom akeadecisionastothem erits

Case 9:22-cv-81780-DMM Document 8 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/29/2022 Page 1 of 34
hhjobtiledforthesolepul-poseofdestroyingamanM s.Jamespubliclyspeaksofwith

disdain.

Iam submittingasexhibitstothisletter proof thatitistruewhenM T.Tnzmp's

attolmeys claim thattheTrump'sarebeingtreatedtmfairly andtmconstitutionally by

bothM s.Jam esandJudgeEngoron.Itoohavebeenthevictim ofthesam etypeof

abusive,sham efulandunconstitutionalconductby bothM s.JamesandJudgeEngoron.

lndeed,theattachedletterdatedN ovem ber4,2022toNew York StateAttorney General

EetitiaJames(ExhibitA)provesthatattheexactsametimeM s.Jameswasattacking

NewYorkCitydeveloperDonaldTrumpwithfalseclaimssheishelpity other

politically cormectedbillionairesgetaw ay withhugeanddestm ctivecrlm esagainstm e.

TheftrstfourparaqaphsofmyNovember2,2022letertoMs.LetitiaJamesshown

below (ExhibitA)glvesasummaryofthetwocrimesagainstmethatM s.James

continuesto collaborateincoveringup asN YSAttom eyGeneral:

çYouhavedeliberately com pletelyir oredaddressingtwohorrificcrim esthat

youknow tookplaceagainstm eandmy wifethatdestroyedourfamilybusiness

Studio450andwipedoutotrlifesavingsofover$2.3milliondollarson

September5,2018.

Specitk ally,youknow thefirstadm ittedcrim einvolvedJudgeJudy Scheindlin's

stepson Gregory ShehzdlinwhostipulatedunderoathathisM ay4,2021

depositionthattheJtme26,2015JuryinterrogatorysheetthatheandJudgeBarry

Ostragerrepresentedasthegrotmdstocollectover1.7m illiondollarson a

personalguaranteeneverevenhadaquestionpertainingtopersonalguaranteeson

theJtme26,2015Juryinterrogatorysheet.(emphasisadded)JudgeOstrager

certainly knew noneofthethreequestionsontheJune26,2015Jury sheetsaid

anythingabouttçpersonalguaranteesçsincehewasthepersonthatwrotethejury

sheetsthathekeptsecretfrom Bradytilthetrialwasover.(emphasisadded)

Youalsoknow thatthesecondprovencrimeisthefactthat1wasforcedtopay

over$500,000.00tothelawyersfortheNew YorkDeveloperswhostolethe$70-

90m illioninairrightsthatw ereaffirm edtobecontracm ally appurtenanttom y

form er12th floorandRoofUnitApartm entin acomm ercialapnrtm entnnm ed450

W est31stStreetOwnersCop .Youknow thattheongoinggaudschem eintM s

airrightscaseistoignorethefactthatmycontract(whichwasregisteredinyotlr

oGcein1980)andthefmalhigherFebrtzary11,2010AppelateDivision,First

2

Case 9:22-cv-81780-DMM Document 8 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/29/2022 Page 2 of 34
D epartm ent Decisionhavealwaysgoverned overthefm allowerJuly 15,2014

Suprem eCourtDecision ofJudgeSlirley Konzreich.

Youneedtostop colludinginthesecrim esdescribedabovesincenoone,

includingyou,isabovethelaw.''

Similarly,myattachedNovember17,2022lettertoJudgeArthurEngoron(ExhibitB),

which includes4exhibits,proveshow tmfairlylwastreatedbybothM s.LetitiaJam es

andJudgeEngoronilzthepast.

H=

W hatm akestheSeptrmber21,2022gaudConlplainttiledbyM s.Jam esagainstthe

Trump'sandtheTrum pOrganizationso givolousapduntrueisthefactthatM s.Jam es

nevereven speaksoforaddressesany ofthemultipleelem entsrequiredforasuccessful

fraudclaim .

Therearetiveelementstoagaudclaim:ç:(1)amaterialmisrepresentationofafact,(2)

knowledgeofitsfalsity,(3)anintenttoinducereliance,(4)justiiablereliancebythe

plainti/ and(5)damages.''EulycleiaPartners.LPMSewardtîKissel..L.L1112N.Y3d

553,559(2009).Aplainti/allegingfraudmustmeeteachelementinordertopmvail,

whetheritbeon am otion èrattrial.M enacov.New York Univ.Afctf Ctr,213A.D .2d

167(1stDept.1995).Failtlretomeetanyoneelementresultsinthedismissalofthe

action.GregoruRossi,120A.D.3d447(1stDept.2014).

A readingoftheSeptember21,2022 ComplaintprovesthatM s.Jam esdeliberately

failedmention orconductapre-filinginquirytodetermineifa11ofthesefivem andatory

elem entslistedabovewerereachedbeforeshefiledtheComplaintagainjttheTrump's.

TheinjusticeagainsttheTrump'swascompoundedbythefactthatJudgeEngoron

adoptedthefalseclaim thattheTrumpscomm ittedFraudwithoutevershowinghow he

m adethatuntenableclaim .M s.James'sgaudallegationswerenotsupportedbythefive

neededelem entsfortheretobealegaland validfraudclaim againsttheTrump'sandthe

Trump Organization.JudgeEngoronneveraddressedthefiveprongsneededforagaud

claim becausehealsoknow thefraudclaim swouldnotpassthetestsneeded foravalid

fraudclaim .

Only oneoftheprongsforafraudclaim isasserted intheComplaint,nnmelythatfor

decadesDonaldTrump,histhreeoldestchildrenandhisOrganization exaggeratedthe

valuesandsizesoftheassetsthattheyowned.

Case 9:22-cv-81780-DMM Document 8 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/29/2022 Page 3 of 34
i

However,whatisnotm entionedintheSeptember21,2022com plaintisthefactthatthe

banksandinsurancecompalliesthatTlalmp usedforhisloansandinsurancepoliciesall

knew f'ullwellthatDonaldTrum pwasnotoriousforgrossly exaggeratingthesizeand

valueoflzisassets.Thepartiestothecontractsknew theclaim swerefalse,which iswhy

thepartiestothecontractsneverin over40yearsassertedthattheyw ereactually çûlied

to''ol'defraudedby'theTrump'sortheTrump Organization.

DonaldTrum pdidnotcom mitfraudby exaggeratingthesizeandvalueofhisassets.

Indeed,itw asthebanksandinsurancecompanieswhom ay havecomm ittedfraudby

goingplongwithTrump'sexaggeratedvaluations.

Byplayingalongwiththeexaggeratedvaluesand sizesofTl-ump'sassets,thebanksand

lsurancecom paniesdonothavecleanhands,whichisoneofthem anyreasonsthese

instimtionsneverassertedthem selvesthattheywerevictim soffraudby theTrump'sor

theTrump Organization.

Underthelaw,M s.JameshasnostandingtochargetheTrump'swith gaudwhenno

such claim isbeingm adeby any ofthesophisticatedpartiestothecontractsthatw ere

enteredintowiththeTrum psinthepast50Years.

M s.Jam esknowsthatevenifDonaldTrump'sexaggerationsofhiswealth aredeem ed

asGGlies,''thatstillwouldnotalonemeanhecom mittedfraudsincetheotherprongs

requiredforasuccessftllfraudclaim havenotbeenreachedorassertedirltheSeptember

21,2022 Complaint.

Itwasnotaçjmistake''thatthereisnodiscussion ofwhatisneededforagaud claim in

theSeptem ber21,2022 Complaint.ItwasadeliberatefalsitybyM s.Jam esandthe

OfficeoftheN ew York StateAttol-neyGeneral.

Trump'slawyersshouldhavem adetheselegalargum entstoJudgeEngoron andthey

shouldhavem adetheseargumentsinthetheirFloridaStateCourtandFloridaFederal

CourtActions.N otm aldngtheseargum entsw ascertainly legalm alpractice.

JudgeEngoron knew orshouldhaveknown aboutthefatalflaw sintheSeptem ber21,

2022 Complaintanddism issedtheSeptem ber21,2022 Complaintasam atteroflaw for

itspleadingfailures.Instead,JudgeEngoronunjustlygozeTnlmp'sassetson

November3,2022afterM s.JamesmadeherOctober31,2022Preliminmylnjunction

M otion tohavetheTrum pAssetsFrozen.N oneoftherequirementsneededforissuinga

preliminaryinjunctionwereperformedorevendiscussedbyJudgeEnjoronorM s.

4

Case 9:22-cv-81780-DMM Document 8 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/29/2022 Page 4 of 34
Jam es,thustheiractionswereanunconstitutionalviolation oftheTrump's

constitutionalrights.

ThefactisthatM s.Jamesfiled such aharsh complaintandsoughtsuchhardpurtishment

againsttheTrump'sandtheTnzmp Organizationwhensheknew herSeptember21,2022

Conlplaintdidnbteven discussany ofthetiveprongsneededtohaveavalidgaud

claim ,provingtheSeptember21,2021Complaintwasfrivolousandtiledin badfaith.

No otherexplanationisplausible.

1

.

ItisundisputedintheSegtember21,2022Complaintthatthebanksthemselvesnever

saidtheyreliedonanythmgDonaldtw mpsaidaboutthesizeandvalueoftheTnlmp

assets.

ltisundisputedintheSeptember21,2022ComplaintthattheTrump'sandtheTnzmp

Organizationneversaid anythingthatthebankscouldnothaveproven falsebytheir

own duediligence.

. î

ltislm disputedin September21,2022 Complaintthatthebanksandinslzrance

companiesalsoneversaidwereharm edin anyw ay.

Theseabovefactsprovetherewasacompletelack offoundation forM s.Jam es'slegal

conclusionsthattheTnlmp'scomm ittedfraud.A review oftheSeptember21,2022

ComplaintprovesM s.Jam esandherofticefailedtoconductapre-filinginquiryto

determ ineiftheallegationsoffraudwouldpassthefiveprongtest.

MyNovember17,2022lettertoJudgeEngoron(ExhibitB)proveshow unfair,cruel

andincompetentthism an is,andm yproofsupportsTrump'sclaim sagainstJudge

Engoron.

TheevidenceintheN ovember17,2022letterprovesJudgeEngoronhasabadhabitof

m akingnzlingsthatdonotfollow therequiredtestsorthefacts.ExhibitB provesthatin

2012.theAppellateDivision,FirstDepartm entreversedevery singlepa14ofadecision

hem adeagainstm ein2010.

JudgeEngoron waswrongagainwhenhewentalongwithfreezingtheTrtzmp assets

withoutconductingatesttodetenuinewhetheranyofthegaudcausesofactionsagainst

theTnzm p'sandtheirOrganizationhadany basisinlaw tmderthefive prongtestthat

hew asrequiredtoutilize.

Case 9:22-cv-81780-DMM Document 8 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/29/2022 Page 5 of 34
ThisCourtshouldpermitTnlmptoamendltisComplaintnow thatithasbeenm ovedto

FederalCourtbyM s.James.lntheamendedComplainttheTrump'sshouldswitchto

competentlawyersthatwouldm aketheargumentsfoundinthislettersincethese

argumentsmeetthefederalrequirementofbeingç:ashortandplainstatementofthe

claimsshowingthatthepleadmg isentitledtotherelief''

Perm ittingM r.Trllmp toamendlzisComplainttom aketheseargllm entsw ouldcertailzly

beinthepublicinterestandwouldbeintheinterestofjustice.

Iam availabletoanswerany questionstheCourtm ayhave.M y em ailaddress

iSBradyny@gmail.com andmycelphonenmnberis201-923-5511.

Sincerely,

>J

Case 9:22-cv-81780-DMM Document 8 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/29/2022 Page 6 of 34
EX H IB IT

A

Case 9:22-cv-81780-DMM Document 8 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/29/2022 Page 7 of 34
November2,2022

Jam esH.Brady

2422AppleRidgeCircle

M anasquan,NJ 08736

New York StateOfficeoftheAttorney General

LetitiaJam es,Attorney General

TheCapitol

Albany,N Y 12224-0341

DearM s.Jam es:

Youhavedeliberately com pletely ignoredaddressingtwohorrificcrim es

thatyouknow tookplaceagainstmeandm ywifethatdestroyedollrfam ily

businessStudio450andwipedoutolrlifesavingsofover$2.3million

dollarson September5,2018.

Specifically,youknow thefirstadm ittedcrim einvolvedJudgeJudy

Scheindlin'sstepson Gregory Scheindlinwhostiptllatedunderoathathis

M ay4,2021depositionthattheJtme26,2015Juryinterrogatorysheetthat

heandJudgeBarryOstragerrepresentedasthegrotmdstocollectover1.7

milliondollarsonapersonalguaranteeneverevenhadaquestionpertaining

topersonalguaranteesontheJune26,2015Juryinterrogatoly sheet.

(emphasisadded)JudgeOstragercertainlylœew noneofthethreequestions

ontheJune26,2015Jury sheetsaidanytbm gaboutfpersonalgur antees

Tfsincehewasthepersonthatwrotethejurysheetsthathekeptsecretfrom

Bradytillthetrialwasover.(emphasisadded)

You alsoknow thatthesecondproven crim eisthefactthatIw asforcedto

payover$500,000.00tothelawyersfortheNew YorkDeveloperswhostole

the$70-90millioninairrightsthatwereaffirmedtobeconlacmally

appurtenanttom yform er12th floorand RoofUnitApartmentina

commercialapartmentnamed450W est31stSîeetOwnersCorp.Youknow

thattheongoingfraudschemeirltlzis airrightscaseistoignorethefactthat

mycontract(wlichwasregisteredinyotlrofficein1980)andthefinal

higherFebrtlary 11,2010AppellateDivision,FirstD epartm entDecision

havealw aysgovernedoverthefinallowerJuly 15,2014 Suprem eCourt

DecisionofJudgeSlirly Kom reich.

Case 9:22-cv-81780-DMM Document 8 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/29/2022 Page 8 of 34
You needtostop colludinginthesecrim esdescribedabovesincenoone,

includingyou,isabovethelaw.

Theattachedletterfrom August15,2019provesthatforyearsyou andyotlr

A ssistantAttorneyGeneralshavebeenpersonallyinvolvedinthecrim esand

covenlpofthetwocrimesprovenandadmittedtohavetakenplaceagainst

m eandmy familythatwiped outourlifesavingon over2.3m illiondollars

on September5,2018.

YourAugust15,2019lettertoJudgeScofieldprovesthatyoualzdyotlr

AssistantAttorneyGeneralJohnathan D.Conleytotallylied andfiercely

insistedonadvancingthetotallyfalseargumentthatafilinginjtmction

imposedagainstm ebyJudgeGeorgeB.DanielsonFebruary 3,2017inthe

caseofBrady vGoldm anw otlldbarm efrom filingacomplaintcrim inal

complaintagainstJudgeBarry Ostrager.

YouandM r.Ostragerknew whenyouwroteyotlrA ugust15,2019letterthat

intruththerewasnothingintheFebruary3,2017filinginjunctionthatcould

becons% ed asgivingBarry Ostragertherighttoschem ewithJudgeJudy

Sheindlin'sstepsonGregory Scheindlintofalselyrepresentthattherew asa

juryfinclingonthethreequestionJune26,2015Juryinterrogatorysheetsthat

thepersonalguaranteesw ereenforceablewhenthey bothknew noneofthe

tk eequestionsontheJury sheetsaidanytlzing pertainingtopersonal

guarantees.Thisfactwasprovenandadm ittedatGregory Sheindlin'sM ay

4,2021depositionwhich youlistenedtoalreadyonYourfube.

ThelastparagraphofyourAugust15,2019lettershowsyou andyour

AssiqtantAttorney Generalm akingthefalseargumentthatJudgeSchofield

shotlldpllnish m eanddism issrqyclaim againstBarry OstragerTfwith

prejudice''fprWfailingtocomplywiththefilinginjtmctionimposedby

JudgeDanials''.

Theseclaim swereknowntobefalsebyyou,M r.Ostrager andM r.Conley

atthetim etheAugust15,2019letterwaswritlen.Yourclaim sandthatof

M r.Conley weresofalseandillogicalthatitwascom pletelyignoredand

replacedw ithtwodifferentfalsemadeupreasons by Judge Schofieldfive

dayslaterinherAugust20,2019OrderofDism issal.

ThefactthatyouandJudgeSchofield gavecompletely differentreasonsfor

dism issingtheclaimsagainstBarryOstragerprovesyouarebothlying.In

Case 9:22-cv-81780-DMM Document 8 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/29/2022 Page 9 of 34
theAugust20,2019DismissalOrderfrom JudgeSchofielditisshow nthat

shesham elesslym adeupherowntwofalsereasonsfordism issingthecase

againstBarryOstrager.IntheOrderJudgeSchofieldsaidshewas

dismissingthecasebasedon1)judicialimmllnityand2)theRookerFeldm anDoctdne.

Youknow itwaswrongandfalseforJudgeSchofieldtom akeupherown

falseexcusesonAugust20,2019todism issmy claim sagainstBarry

Os/agerthatw erenotarplm entsfordism issalm adebyJudgeOstrager,you

oryolrAssistantAttomeyGeneraljustfivedaysearlierinyourattached

August15,2019letter

RegardlessoftheOrderofDismissalthefraudulentmisrepresentation ofthe

Jury findingsw erecriminalactionsbyJudgeOstragerandGregory

Sheincllinthatmustbeaddressedbyyotlrofficenow sincenooneisabove

thelaw.

Ihavearighttopresschargesforthetwoschem esthatdestroyedm y

livelihoodandrestlltedinthetheftofover2.3milliondollarson September

5,2018.

Nooneisabovethelaw andthecrim esIsaidtook placewereadm ittedto

havetakenplaceatSheindlin'sMay4,2021Deposition.(thedeposition

tapescanbefoundonYourfube)

ThefactisM r.Scheindlinlsdepositiontestimonyfrom M ay 4,2021isnew

evidenceprovingJudgeSchofieldwastotallywrongorliedwhenshesaid

thatthecaseagainstOstragerwasbarredbyJudicialim munity orthe

Rooker-Feldm andocîine.lndeed,sinceSheindlinsaidathisdepositionthat

thethreequestionJune26,2015juryinterrogatorysheetsaidTfabsolutely

nothingaboutpersonalguarantees''thatprovesBradycotldnothavelostin

StateCourtonthisthresholdandsoleissue.SinceSheindlinsaid theissue

ofpersonalguaranteeswerenotevenonthethreequestionJury Sheetthat

m eanstheJury couldnothaveeverfoundinfavorofthelandlordand

againstBradythatthepersonalguaranteeswereenforceable.

InthesecondtolastparagraphofyourAugust15,2019letteritisshownthat

you aresham elessly advancingastruthM agistrateJudgeBarbaraM oses

falseclaim thatthefilinginjunctioninGoldmanwouldbarclaimsagainst

BarryOstrager.Thefalseargum entw assountrueinM agistrateM oses

ReportandRecommendationthatitwascompletelyrejectedandreversedby

JudgeCaproniin aSeptember2019Decision.

Case 9:22-cv-81780-DMM Document 8 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/29/2022 Page 10 of 34
Attlzispointyouneedtokeatm eequally andletm efilecom plaints

pertainingtothetwocrim esthatIhaveproventobethevictim ofby

politically cormectedpeople.M y cellphonenumberis201-923-5511and

myemailisBradpzy@ gmail.com

Sincerely,

Jam esH.Brady

Case 9:22-cv-81780-DMM Document 8 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/29/2022 Page 11 of 34
'

.

.

EX. H IB IT

.

' .

B

'

,

.

'

.

.

'

.

Case 9:22-cv-81780-DMM Document 8 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/29/2022 Page 12 of 34
N ovem ber17,2022

Jam esH .Brady

2422AppleRidgeCircle

M anasquan,N J 08736

Hon.JusticeArthurEngoron

60CentreStreet

N ew York,N Y 10007

Re:lndexN o.452564-2022,Peoplet?ftheStateq/W cw Yorkv.Donaldl Trump.etal

D earJudgeEngoron:

Iam writingyouwithvery im portantinform ationpertainingtothecaselistedaboveand

therelatedcasesbeforethisCourt.

Ihavefirsthandirrefutableinform ationthatisvery im pol-tanttothiscaseandtherelated

casesbeforethisCourt.

First,form erPresidentDonaldTrum p,hisfam ily andhisbusinessareentitledtobe

treatedfairly tmderthe1aw andcompetentlybyAttorney GeneralLetitiaJamesandby

thisCourt.Theevidenceinthisletterprovesthiscertainlyisnothappening.

Thism istreatm entbringsbackverybadm emoriessinceinthepastltoohavebeen

treatedverytmfairlybyyouandM s.Jam es.

lnthisshortletterwith its4exhibits,1willprovehow thisCourtandM s.Jam eshave

treatedm eunfairly inthepast,andwhy itistruethattheTrump'sandtheirOrganization

arethevictim ofthesam epattel'nofunfairconductbythisCourtandillegalconductby

M s.James.JustliketheTrump's,Iabsolutelybelievethat1havebeenthevictim of

viciousbiasandm ean conductbybothM s.Jam esandtllisCom't.

Myevidenceofyourunjustandwrongactionsagainstmearebestprovenbyreading

yourattached,tmprofessionalhalfpagelongNovem ber29,2010decisionwhich leftm e

owingthelandlord1GSRealtyoveronemiliondollars(Exhibit1).

Case 9:22-cv-81780-DMM Document 8 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/29/2022 Page 13 of 34
Yourcruelcourtdecision wassom çanandfalsethateverythingyousgidinyour

Novem ber29,2010 decisionw asreversed in anA ppellateDivision,FirstD epartment

decisiondatedOctober11,2012.(Exhibit2).

Exhibit2provesthetivejudgesoftheAppelateDivision,FirstDepnrtmentreversed

every singlefmdingyoum adeagainstmeinyotlrclmel,half-page,single-spaced

decision.

A readingofyourNovember29,2010decision(Exhibit1)showsyoumockingmeand

showsyoudidqotbelievethat1,asaCluistian,wasworthyofaproperandjust

adjudicationofmymotiontovacatemycorporations'defaultjudgments9om October

13,2009.A readingofyourdecisionprovesthatalthough itisonly ahalf-pagelong it

isfilledwithm eanptmchesagainstm e.Infact,yolzrdecisionshowsyoudidnoteven

bothertotrytosupportyourdecisionwithanycase1aw asthereisno case1aw

supportingyourumeasonablerefusaltonotvacatethedefaultjudgmentsagainstme.

Indeed,althoughyourwholedecisionwasonlyhalfapagelong itwasalsointem ally

inconsistenti.n avery harm ingwaybecauseononesideofyotlrm outhyou saidyou

werenotvacatingthedefaultjudgments,andontheothersideofyotlrmouthyousaid

thecasebelongedin Suprem eCourt.Thesetwoconflictingclaim scannotcoexist. By

notvacatingthedefaultjudgments,theSupremeCourtjudgesusedresjudicatato

dism issmy claim sanddefenses.

Youknoworshouldhaveknown,yourrefusaltovacatethedefaultsbecameviewedas

anadjudicationonthemerits,barrlngmeofanyabilitytohavemyclaimsand.defenses

litigatedin SupremeCourt.Youlm ew,orshouldhaveknown,thisw ouldhappen and

youshouldhavebeenjustandsaidthedefaultswerevacatedandthenmovedthecaseto

theSuprem eCourt.Butyouw eretoofocused onabusingm e.

Regardlessofthefactthatyotlrdecision wascompletelyreversedyearslaterbythe

AppellateDivision,FirstD epartm ent,yourcruelandcondescendingsingle-spaced, halfpagedecision causedirreversibleharm andfrarlkly destroyedm y lifeandlivelihood.

Inmym otiontohavethedefaultsvacated,youweretoldallofthem eritoriousreasons

why mythreecorporationsdidnothaveanattorneypresentforasum m aryproceeding

onOctober13,2009.Yetw ithoutanybasisoffactorlaw,yousaidinyourdecision that

1)Ididnothaveareasonableexcuseformycol-porations'defaults,and2)thatmy

m otiontohavethedefaultsvacatedwasm ade10m onthstoolate.

2

Case 9:22-cv-81780-DMM Document 8 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/29/2022 Page 14 of 34
TheattachedAppellateDivision,FirstDepartmentDecision(Exhibit2)provesthatthe5

judgesofthehighercom'tunanimouslydisagreedwithyouonbothofyourclaims

againstm e,andthehighercourttmanim ously ruledthatasam atterof1aw andfactyou

w erem 'ongwhenyou saidthat1waitedtenm onthstoolongtom akemym otion.The

higherCourtruledmym otionwastim ely asam atterof1aw sinceitw asm adewitilin

oneyearofthedefaults.TheFirstDepartmentjudgesalsounnnimouslyruledthatyou

w erewronginyourclaim thatIdidnothaveavalidexcuseformy corporations'

defaults.

Inthepresentc>sesbeforeyou,1nm seeingthçform erpresident,hiscompany andhis

fam ilyarehavingtheirlivesandlivelihoodsdestroyedbyyourtmprecedentedgleeful

willingnesstoletLetitiaJamesproceedwith gaud claim sagainsttheTl-ump'sandthe

TrumpOrganizationthatshouldhaveneverhavebeenbroughtbyM s.James,and asa

m atteroflaw shouldneverhavebeenallowedtoproceedbyyousinceNON E ofthe

elem entsneededforafraud claim exist.

Indeed,thepresentcasesbeforethisCourtanda1loftheassertionsbeingm adebyM s.

Jam esagainsttheTrump'sandtheTrump Organization centeraroundclaim soffraud

againstbanksand insurancecompanies.W hyisLetitiaJam esmakingclaimsoffraud

againstbanksandinstlrancecompanieswhentheseinstitutionshaveneverinover40

yearsmadetheseclaim sthem selvesagainstany oftheTrump'sortheTrump

Organization?

Furtherm ore,boththecurrentM anhattanDistrictAttorneyandthecurrentUnited States

Attom eyfortheSouthem DistrictofN ew Yorkhavethesam einform ationthatM s.

Jam eshaspresentedbeforethisCourt,butthesetwoprosecutorshaverefusedtocharge

any oftheTrump'swithfraudforatleastthreeindependentreasons.

ThefirstreasontheM anhattanDistrictAttorneyandtheUnited StatesAttorney forthe

Southem DistrictofN ew Yorkarenotm aking gaudclaim sagainsttheTrump'sandtheir

Organization isbecausethey havenostandingtom akeup fraudchargesagainstthe

Trump'sthathaveneverbeenassertedbythebanksorany otherpartieswhoenteredinto

contractswiththeTrump'sandtheirOrganization overthecourseofthepast45plus

yeafs.

Second,asam atteroflaw,forafraudclaim to survive,therem ustbeapartytothe

contractclaimingthattheywerehnrmedorinjuredbytheTrump'sexaggerationofthe

sizeandvalueoftheirassets.Thatalsoneverhappened soyouneedtodism issthecases

beforeyou.

3

Case 9:22-cv-81780-DMM Document 8 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/29/2022 Page 15 of 34
Third,asamatteroflaw,forsom eonetom akeavalidgaudclaim ,theparty makingthe

claim m ustarguethattherewasareasonablerelianceonthestatementsm adebythe

Trump'sthatthey couldnothavediscoveredasfalsetlzroughtheirownduediligence.

Noneoflisted abovethreerequkementsforagaudclaim evertookplace,whichm eans

franldythatyouhaveabsolutelynojustisablebasistonotdropthechargesagainstthe

Trump'sandtheirOrganization.

lnfact,publiclyavailabledocpmentaryevidence(includingdocumentaryfilms9om

over25yearsago)provesthat,forover40years,sinceDonaldTrumpwasinhis20s,he

andthebankshyvehadarelationshiptogetherwhereM r.Trump would alwaysclaim his

propertieswereworthm orethanthey were.M rTrtzmpsexaggeratedclaim sastothe

valueand sizeofthetrum p assetsdidnotm eanhewascomm ittingfraud,which iswhy

ip over40yearsnootherlaw enforcem entofticialbesidesM s.Jam esevereventhought

ofcharging anyoftheTrump'sortheirOrganizationw ith fraudforsayhzgthattheir

propertiesw erewo14hm oreorwerelargerthanthey were.N oreliancewhatsoeverwas

everplacedontheseclaim sbythebanksorinsurancecompanies.Everybody knows

theseinstitutionsw ererequiredtoperform theirownindependentduediligenceastothe

sizeandvalueoftheTnzmp assetsbeforeany loansorinstlrancepolicieswereissuedto

theTrumpsandtheTrump Organization.

Everybodyknowsthatsincethelendinginstim tionshad.theirown dh'tyhandsforgping

alongwiththeiM atedvalues,theselenderscouldneverclaim thattheyw erethevictim s

offraudbytheTrump'sortheirOrgnnization.

Everybodyknow sthebankswereallrequiredtodotheirduediligence,which absolutely

includesdoingtheirown appraisalsandmeasm ementsoftheTrumpproperties.Thisis

why inover40yearsno one,includinganyother1aw enfow ementofficialotherthan

M s.Jam es,eyerclaim edtohavebeendeâaudedbytheTrump'sinflated assertions

regardingtheworth andsizeoftheirproperties.

A review oftheComplaintbyM s.Jamesalzdareview ofyourdecisionsprovesneither

ofyouekerexplainedhpw youcouldjustifypermittingthesefalseclaimsoffraudto

proceed againsttheTrump'sandtheTrump Organization.

Youneedtoaddressthesedestructivefailm esbythisCourtandM s.Jam essincelhave

proventotliscourtthat,asamatterof1aw 1)therequiredelementsforafraudclaim

donotapplytotheTrtzmp's;2)M s.Jameshasnostandingtoclaim thattheTrump'sand

theirOrganizationcomm ittedgaud incomm ercialcontractsm adeby sophisticatedlegal

counselformajorbankswhenthepartiestothecontracthaveneverthemselvesmade

Case 9:22-cv-81780-DMM Document 8 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/29/2022 Page 16 of 34
thoseclaims;3)ltisimpossibleforthegaudclaimstoproceedagainsttheTrump'sand

itsOrgalizationwhen,asam atteroflaw,theclaim m ustbedism issed sincetherewas

neveranyreasonablerelianceon thevalueorsizeofthepropertiesthatappearedonthe

applications;andtinally4)Asamatterof1aw itisimpoysibletohaveagaudclaim

againsttheTrumpsandtheirOrganization whennopartytothecontracteversaidthey

w ereharm ed inanywayby theinflatedvaluesand sizesoftheTrump assets.

TheotherreasonforthislettertotheCourtistoletyouknow thatitisM s.Jam eswhois

atotalfraudmasqueradingasGthepeople'slawyer''whensheisactualyascon-uptand

politicalascanbe.Indeed,myevidenceobjectlvelyprovesthatattheexactsametime

M s.Jam esistryingtodestroytheTrump'sandtheirOrganizationsheisengagingintwo

differenthorrificcrim esagainstm e.

ThefirstcrimeandfraudschemebyM s.Jamesagainjtmeisthefactthatatthesame

exacttim esheistryingtodestroyN ew YorkCitydeveloperD onaldTrump,hischildren,

andlisOrganization,M s.Jam eshasbeenactivelym aking surethatN ew York City

developerJefferyKatzandhisorganization SherwoodEquitiesgetawaywithstealing

the$70-90millionindevelopmentrightsthatwerecontracttzallyappurtenanttomy

form er12thFloorandRoofUrlitApartm entinacom mercialco-opnam ed450W est31St

StreetOm zersCorp.

M s.Jam es'sflrstfraudschem ewastoparticipateintheillegalschem ewhereby my

offeringplan contractthatistiledwithherofficeand fm alhigherAppellateDivision,

FirstDepartmentdecision9om February 11,2010arebeing completely ignored,andthe

unlawfulreplacedwith afm allowercourtSuprem eCourtJune15,2014 decisionthatis

fraudulentlybeingrepresented asthetrueandgovelming contract.

Thefactthecrim etookplaceisshownbelow.

TheSeventhParagraphFootnotetotheScheduleofUnitsoftheAm ended OfferingPlan

readsasfollows:

ttseventhParagraph -NEW -The 12thFloorandRoofUnitShallhave,in addition

totheutilizationoftherootlthe righttoconstructorextendstructuresontheroof

orabovethesnm e,totheextentthatm ay 9om tim etotim ebepermittedtmder

applicablelaw.''

TheAypellateDivision,FirstDepartment,February11,2010Decisionendedwiththe

followm gwords.

Case 9:22-cv-81780-DMM Document 8 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/29/2022 Page 17 of 34
,Ptlrsuanttoparagraph7,thatplaintiffshavetherighttoconstructorextend

structuresupontherooforabovethesam etotheextentthatm ayfrom tim eto

tim ebepermittedtmderapplicablelaw,unanim ously am rmed,withoutcosts.

JusticeKonweich'sSupremeCourtJuly 15,2014D ecisionm writesthe>bovetoread:

lthasalreadybeenadjudgedthatwliletheownersofthelmitmayhavethel'ight

toerectadditionalstructuresontheroof,thatrightdoesnotentitlethem touse

anyfloorareaitldohy so(PriorAction,decisionandorder,Mar13,2009at*2&

*4-*5(çW othingherem shallbeconstruedasholdingthatplaintiFshavetheright

tousea1loranypartoftheTDRSin connectionw ithsuohconstruction or

extension''qBrak v4507 31stSt.Owncr::Corp.,70AD3d469,470(1stDept

20101(holdingthattheofferingplanGçreservesforplaintiFstheright....to

constructorextendstructuresontheroofthatm ay bebuiltwithouttheuseofthe

building'sdevelopmentrights.'')

Everyword9om theofreringplan contractandhighercourtdeterm inationw astaken out

unlawfully andreplacedbyJudgeKornreich.UndertheAppellateDivision decision,I

havetherighttotheutilization oftheprem ise's70-90millionin developm entl'ights.

UnderJudgeKo= eich'srewording,1havenothinqatall.NewYorkStatelaw isvery

cleagthatan unam biguouscontractcnnnotberewnttenbythecourts:

çW henpartiessetdowntheiragreem entinaclear,completedocllment,their

writingshouldbeerlforcedaccordingtoitsterm so''K JII7 Assoc.v Giancontieri,

77NY2d157,16210(1990J.Andçtcoul'tsmaynotbyconstructionaddorexcise

term s,nordistortthem eaning ofthoseusedandtherebym akeanew contractfor

thejartiestmdertheguiseofintepretingthewriting.''çlntheabsenceofany

am blguity,welook solelytothelanguageusedbythepartiestodiscem the

contract'smeaning.''VèrmontTeddyBearv.538M adisonActz/fy Co.,308AD2d

33(2004).

Theam endçdOfferingPlan thathasbeensittingi.n M s.Jam esoo cesince 1980is

attachedasExhibit3.

ltisan ongoingcriminalactthatM s.Jnm esisnotaddressingthefactthatmy Oftkring

Plan andAppellateDivision decisionhavebeenrewrittenbythelowercouit.Thatis

becauseVs.Jamesknowsthatmycontractandhighercourtdecisiongovem over$he

lowercourtdecision.Ms.Jamesalsolmowsthattilinginjunctionshavebeenplaced

againstmeinStateandFederalCourtwiththehopethatInevergetjusticeforthis

crim inalact.

6

Case 9:22-cv-81780-DMM Document 8 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/29/2022 Page 18 of 34
=11

Thesecondcrim eandgaudschemethatM s.Jamesiscolludinginagainstm ethatis

going onrightnow isthefraud schem etom akesttrethatJudgeJudy Sheindlin'sstepsonGregory Sheindlingetsawaywiththecrimeofforcingthesaleofmy

fam ily businessanddestroyedmy livelihoodon September5,2018by creatinga

colectionactionofover$1.7milliondolal'sbygaudulentlyrepresentingGçthrough

implicationonly''thattherewasastatecourtjuryûndingonaJune26,2015Jury

interrogatory sheetthatthepersonalguaranteesIsir edwith1GS Realty were

enforceable.Mr.Sheindlinknewtherewasnosuchfmdingmythejury,andhe

criminallymisrepresentedthatsuchafmdinghadbeenhandeddownbythejury.

ltneedstobenoted inthisletterthatitwasJudgeBarry Ostragerwho comm ittedthe

fraudwithSheindlinofpretendingtherewasajtuyfmdingthatthepersonalguarantees

wereenforceable.

M.r.Sheindlhfsgaudulentimpliedrepresentationthatthejuryruledthatthepersonal

guaranteeswereenforceablewasadm ittedtobetotallyfalsebyM r.Sheindlinhim selfat

hisM ay4,2021Deposition.TheCotu'tcan hearSheindlin'sdeposition onYouTube.

AttheM ay 4,2021deposition,Sheindlin andlisattorneyadm ittedthefollowing:

(p.41-42)M R..SUSSM AN:Holdon.Webothcan'tspeakatthesametime.The

gentlem an hasexplainedtoyou exactlywhathedid.It'salsointhedocllm ent.

Thedocum entspeaksföritself.Itsa-ysnothingaboutapersonalguarantee.

That'sadm itted.W ecanstipulatet-olhatsowedon'thavetoworr.yaboutthat.

ltwasalsoadmittedthatBrady'sdefenseswerenotevenonthethreequestionJury

interrogatory Sheetseither:

(p.86-81 M R..SUSSMAN:Here'swhatwecando.Whydon'twestipulateto

thefactthatthejuryinterogatorysayswhatitsays,meaningthatanumberof

yotlrdefensesasyouputthem inyotlranswer,yourverifiedanswer.arenot

specifkalystatedorsetforthonthejur.yinterrogatorysheet.'That'swhatwecan

a11av eeon.

Case 9:22-cv-81780-DMM Document 8 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/29/2022 Page 19 of 34
TherecordprovesM r.Sheindlinhim selffraudulently wroteandcreatedthecollection

action sir ed bytheCotmty Clerk'sOfficeonM ay 31,2017.Theadm issionsat

Sheindlin'sM ay 4,2021D epositionproveSheindlindidnotsim ply çenforce''a

judgmentthatalreadyexistedagainstBradyaspersonalguarantorbutinstead

fraudulentlym isrepresentedtheJuryfm dingsusingthefollowinggaudulentwordsand

nothingelse:

ThejtuyrenderedaverdictonJune26,2015,infavorofPlaintiff,againstthe

defendant,inthesum of$541,758.62.(IGSActz/f.pv.JamesH Brak ,CaseNo.

603561/2009@ YSI,Judgment,May31,2017).

Despiteknowinga11ofthesefacts,M s.Jam eshasrefusedtodoanythingaboutthis

crim ebuthasinsteadcolludedwithM r.SheindlinandJudgeOstragerto coverup the

crimeofstealingover$1.7millionfrom meandmyfamilyonSeptember5,2018.

M s.Jam esknowsJudgeBarry Ostragerwasinvolvedinthisfraudschem ewith Gregory

Sheindlin.JudgeOstragerm'otethethree-questionjuryinterrogatorysheetandheknew

theysaidnothingaboutpersonalguaranteesormydefenses.Ms.Jamesknew thejury

couldnothavenlledthepersonalguaranteesw ereenforce>bleasthequestionwasnot

evenonthejurysheet.

Exhibit4isaletterinthecaseofBradyuOstrager(19-cv-07122)whichshowsNew

York StateAttorneyGeneralJam escom pletecom lption andcom m itm enttothecrimes

againstmethatarelistedabove.TheAugust15,2019lettershowsJamesattacldngme

w lthfalseclaim s.ThedocketsheetprovesthatJudgeSchofieldcouldnotadoptthe

reasonsstatedinthelettertodism issm yComplaint,so in ordertohelpM s.Jam esget

away withthecrim e,JudgeSchotieldneededtom akeupherown falsereasons5days

lateronAugust20,2019.

Schofielddismissedthecaseonthefalse,trumpedugexcusethattheclaimswerebarred

byjudicialimmtmityandtheRooker-FeldmanDoctnne.Ifthosereasonswereirue,the

AttorneyGeneralwouldhavegiventhosereasonsinherAugust15,2019letter.

ln conclusion,noneoftherequiredelem entsforafraudclaim againsttheTrump'sand

theirOrganization areeven discussedbyM s.Jam esorthisCotu't.Thefactisthatitis

notjustthatyouwillbecausingirreversiblehnrm toDonaldTrump,hisfamilyandhis

organizationwhenlprovedinthisletterthatnoneoftheelementsforafraud exist. N o

onewaseverdegauded.

8

Case 9:22-cv-81780-DMM Document 8 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/29/2022 Page 20 of 34
UndertheconstitutiontheTnzmpfamilyandOrganization certainly havearighttoa

prosecutorwhoisnotherselfcuaentlyengagingincrim inalconduct.ThisCourtm ust

im mediately addressthem eritsofmy claim thatM s.Jam esisengaging incriminal

conduct.lfmy assertionsaretrue,thecasesagainsttheTrum p'smustbedismissedoand

M s.Jamesmustbeprevented9om continuingtoengagein such destructive,tm lawful

conduct,which nootherprosecutorhaseverasserted againsttheTrump'sinthefortyfiveplusyearsinwhichM r.Tntmpandhisfamily havebeenengagingwithbanksand

lendersasqN ew York Citydekeloper.

lam availablebyemailatBradyny@ gmail.com ormycelphonenlmber201-923-5511

if1am neededforfurtherinform ation

. Sincerely,

'

)

. ;

.

e

. '

.

k'

j

'

9

Case 9:22-cv-81780-DMM Document 8 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/29/2022 Page 21 of 34
EX H IB IT

1

Case 9:22-cv-81780-DMM Document 8 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/29/2022 Page 22 of 34
CIW L COURTOFTHECITY OFNEW YORK

COUNTYOFNEW YORK:PART52/72

IGSREALTY CO.,L.P.,

Pditioner, JmdpxNt'm ber:55601/2009

M otionCalendarNlmber:26

SubmissionDate:11/5/1û

DecisionandOrdqr

- againstJAM ESCATEIO G,m C.,

Respondent.

IGS ALTY CO., L.P.,

Petitionery lndexNllm ber:55602/2009

MntïonCalendnrNllmber:26

SubmissionDate:11/5/10

DçcisionandOrdvr

- age stW EST SJD ELOFT AT 37THST

.y lNC.,

Respondent.

Petitioner, IudexNllmber:55603/2009

A

M otionCalenrlnrN'lmber:26

SubmissionDate:11/5/10

DedsionandOrder

- against- '

LOFTELEVEN JNCORPO TED

,

Respo.ndent.

A.l4lltlrF Engoron,Judge

Incompliancewith.CPLR2219(a),thisCourtstatesthatthefolowingpa

pers,n'tmbered1to3.usedonthismotionbyrespondentsto wero

vacatedefauitj.udm entsila1tbreecases:

PapersNumhered:

Page1of2

Case 9:22-cv-81780-DMM Document 8 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/29/2022 Page 23 of 34
Upontheforegoingpapers,theinstantmotionisdenied.

Thçmovingpapersarelong, butthisopinionwillberelativelyshort. In 2009petitionercommenced

theinstantGvictionproceedingsagainstrespondents, whichoperateeventspaces.InSeptemberof

thatyegr,ontheeveoftrial,andalmostayearpriortothesubmission.oftheapplicationforthe

instantordertoshow cause,petitiuneranditscounselallegedlyconvincedrespondents'counselto

Ceelctowithdraw from representing respondents. Ajudgeçlunfairly''allowedthtwithdrawal;

' :. respondents'plincipalwastturlfairly''convincedthathehadnodefense;andrespondents'xunfairly''' ' '

sulrenderedthespacesanddefaultedintheseproceedings. .

.

. Respondentsatlempted,intlu'eestparateinstances, toretnl'nnew attom eys,but,allegedly;noneof . .

them wouldtfstepuptotheplate.''Respoadents'principalallegedlybecamedesptmdentandsick

andcoulddonothingforawhile. From Januaz'ythroughM aythepal'tiesallegedlynegotiated,but

thefilecontaitlsscant,ifany,detail.InM ay,inaSupremeComlaction fordnmagesthat

respondentscomm encedagainstpeétioner, thejudgedeniedpetitioner'smotionforsummary

. judgment.Somethreemonthslater,respondentsmadetheinstantmotion.

Them otionisdeniedfortwoindependent'reasons. First,itwasbroughtabout10monthstoolate,

andthe1aw isclearthatapartyseekingtovacateadefaultmustdosowithreasonablealacrity

. That .

clearlvwasnotdonehere.Respondents'argtunentthattheSupremeCotl'tdecisioninM ay

.

constitutesatfnew fact''issimplywrong. Ifanything,thatdeoisionhighlightsthefactthatthe .

disputebetweenthepartiesbelongsinSupremeCourtasadnm ageaction

,notinCivilCotzrtasa

possessol-yproceecling,possessionhavingbeenstr enderedayearago. Fm-thenugre,respondents

waitedfm'toolongaftertheSupremeCourtdecision

,too.Second,respondentshavenoreasonable

excusefortheirtlefauit.:ûIcouidnothndareplacem entattom eyintim etotakeI.'liecase''simplyis

notareasonableexcuse,espeoiallyinasumm atyproceeding. 'fndeed,respondmltsseem beseeldngtobereargueth ,inpazyta- . edeoisiontorelievetheircounsel,whichisttlaw ofthecase.''Finally,the

sun-enderanddefaultwd'enottheresultofcoercionorduress, which,lightly,arediK cultclaimsto ' '

sustain,

Thus,tileinstantm ùtionisdeniedinitsentirety.

-'

,

'

Dated: . Novem ber29-2010 .... . .

'

.

.., .

' '

ArthurF.Engoron,J.'C.C. '

.

'

J

ckvijcourt

qytj,e.

CltyojNeczvoru .

w

'

lJ-LJ$2 -iJ-2112' '

Page2of 2 . rj;7.!pw.z,pj.zpxxpz=D.. ' '

NEW YORK CO

Case 9:22-cv-81780-DMM Document 8 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/29/2022 Page 24 of 34
EX H IB IT

2

Case 9:22-cv-81780-DMM Document 8 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/29/2022 Page 25 of 34
2:12INY SlipOp 06843

IGSREALTY CO .,L.P.,Petitionçr-Respondent,

V.

JAM ES CATERING ,INC.,DOING BUSW ESSAS LOFT ELEVEN,ETC .,

Respondent-Appellant.

IGSREALTY ,CO .,L.P.,Petitioner-Respondent,

, V.

LOFT W EST SIDE AT 37thSTREET,INC.,ETC.,Respondent-Appellant.

IWSREALTY,CO.,L.P.,Petitioner-Respondent,

V.

LOFT ELEW N INC.,Respondent-Appellant.

W EST SIDE LOFT,INC.,ET AL.,Plaintiffs-Appellants,

V.

IGS REALTY CO .,ET AL.,Defendants-kespondents.

IGSREALTY ,INC.,L.P.,ETC .,Plaintiff-Respondent,

W.

JAM ESH .BRADY,Defendant-Appellant.

8263-570674/11,8263A,8262,600740/09,8261,603561/09.

AppellateDivisionoftheSupremeCourtofNeY York,FirstDepartment.

Decided October11,2012.

Law OftkesofEdwardAlper,New York(EdwardAlperofcounsel),forJamesCatering,lnc.,

W estSideLoh,lnc.,andLoltElevenlnc.,appellants.

RobertJ.Adinolf,New York,forJamesH.Brady,appellant'.

t

BryanCaveLLP,NewYork(DanielP.Waxmanofcounsel),forrespondents.

Before'.Andrias,J.P.,Friedm an,M oskowitz,Freedm an,JJ.

Althoughtenants'argumentthatIGSRealtyneverservedthedefaultjudgmentswithnoticeof

entryisnotpreservedforajpsllatereview(seee.g.Ta-chotanivDoubleclick.Inc..116AD2d

313(1stDept20001),itislrelevantsincethemotiontovacatewastimely.Assumingtheclock

begantickingonthedateofentrystampedonthejudgnynts,tenants'motlonwasmadewithin

oneyear(seeCPLR5015(aJ(11).Further,tenantsestablshedbothareasonableexcusefortheir

faillzretoappearwithcounselonOctober13,2009andameritoriousdefensetoIGSRealty's

nonpaymentproceedings.

Asaresultoftenants'inabilitytoobtainsubstitutecounselwithin13dayjofpriorcotmselbeing

relievbdbythecourt,tenantsandBrady,theirprincipal,havebeendepnvedoftheirdayincourt

Case 9:22-cv-81780-DMM Document 8 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/29/2022 Page 26 of 34
in fourcases:theCivilCoul'tproceedingsbroughtbythelGSRealty,theSupremeCourtactions

betweentenantsand1GSRealty,andtheSuprem eCourtactionbetweenIGSRealtyandBrady.

Giventhedisputedissuesoffactinthesecases,theyshouldberesolvedbytrial,notdefault. (see

AckersonvStranmaglia.176AD2d602.604(1stDept19911).Sincewearegrantingthemotion

tovabatetheCivilCourtjudgments,theynolongerhaveresjudicataeffect(seee.g.Trisinzh

Enters.vKessler.249AD2d45.46(1stDept19981).Thus,theSupremeCourtorderand

judgment,whichwerebasedonresjudicata,mustbereversed.

Tenants'crossmotionforleavetoam endthecomplaintinindexno.650463/09shouldhavebeen

granted.Them otioncourterredinfindingthatteflantsfailedtofurnishaproposedam ended

complaint.Furthenuore,theproposedgaudclaim wassufficientlyspecitk (seePludemanv

NorthernLeasingSys..Inc..10NY3d486.491g2008J).

Brady'scontentionthatheisentitledtosummaryjudjmentin1GSRealty'sactiononhis

guaranteesisupavailing.Hefailedtopreservehisclalm thattheguaranteesareunenforceableas

unconscionableandthereareissuesoffactastowhetherIGSRealtyfailedtoperform its

obligationstotenants. '

THISCONSTITW ESTlœ DECISION ANllORDER OF THE SUPREW COURT,

APPELLATE DIVISION ,FIRSTDEPARTM ENT.

Case 9:22-cv-81780-DMM Document 8 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/29/2022 Page 27 of 34
I

EX H IMIT

3

Case 9:22-cv-81780-DMM Document 8 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/29/2022 Page 28 of 34
i

E+ MaepZ VTQILM - 11/1/8: - t'0/E'1/BI'5 sd:.luI3r'BM vl nm 'j

ndou aqo oo-odexxxzxa apgdo=upyoup

ooadogëazou' 4qo golmoxT uB aoua=uaas XTII oxlsa eup qq qTupTub

laoncgq dexvbXedqI ndou pTokzàs og 4TaTa a#aq aqp oo-odecxqwwa

qnTlpzus ys TJ eu kl-s meunleapnalub poulbneualZ llQsop 46 4ue wmueua aoadocelTou pu W2Z tb# ls*o' =qe

ou NQABGqBX c0? T6t6- iqe eloaaseyp Tvupt vup qnslp:ul maae s s

lq @-

)8TJ@4 deaelxedqt dop 4F4Ta ao 4q= zeùbi eup qnzTpyub me& robnTcep

.....z

KttDltI4aTkION O:.'dlzodalzilxA

œ goop daôbesszul

aoszxp oqemwavlsz )p( p.o,mmaaoAkl pu@lmeI qleùpTubJ ;ç(. nqpïes/la

da/skTuS oAkzYqc/iq#ruhf MnTdutouqJ jE( sl'ol-k H oJ D ATOSTAP 11. Dog-

)Q( WOPTDPT oI p M6. 422+.7!1*r14 oauqacst )z(r upmaA sq >tdTuF1

zoxzonlaus naesz

l,JltT reeuqq de ubgvdlt( sdbusoà nTII uo4 siell 2uA nu545 JQ7 4V9

9= .vbaeemeuqpt' m2Z qe lo mup öû.dkbo 101-

lelealeP 4o es asnqsolTdlToù v5Ibampu42u dnaoqpge vbaeomau M 4,I JSTx4q dpleb=edq( iqe sàqaa=TdqTou vRY='pmpu4' )qa=agueglaI

-. -..

' '. .

TN.T'uocno.cioN

Kpn IOJXr Rpx ao=X IB9Ce

D/b gzaqu/g' 1*IIZ â Hpk7elT

:tsa saawa4 lepI4g vssoaleaes

K** IoJW'' N1n AOJX T90rr

asn mqTgp vxauno

Q/O /VDVDBR' é2IïZ f WPu4eII

tl-q s4A>a* uoulgA vssoaAxpes

OA. saIeI'IND vD;R4I

N N att YGG ASS

oa sdoNsouI

,# * eq. Wquats

rlu/s I9-=E(

:oAgî d9D?

dlku yû qqo eqolewpya:ep oouAe=syouz

ol/aTgZ *up moplgZ sel+eTu. d=oAlsTous ol %qe OXTSTVPI O1JpITu5

1qe zpTronlub emeupmouqs exe 4p=pq/ mepa Tv ox#mI qQ

Re8 Ao7#' Nmx Aoal

#90 MBS4 fTS7 541G97

d:l<llsaS Ymû

d m mo oo m a mo oooasIwm w o -uskza

.t

.

'

s-ayripwùxhnwamzzobaaaazxD

Case 9:22-cv-81780-DMM Document 8 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/29/2022 Page 29 of 34
eoou otes

(First 'Paragraphl The gross footaqes se< fovth herein nvapprovlmaete and thore wirl be no adjus+'monks ia the.purchase

pryee if khe square föotage varies less ehwn 5:. If the actual -

squaré footage .ok t:e uaiE is liss +hnn tie square footage set

'

:o th nhnve by pore thah 5*, then ia that levent, @ prppovel-onate

kadYnus+mont wikl be made i-n the purchase px(ice bàsèd qpop 2'he

percentagp difrerence in tha twp amounts- Th@ ppecedm'n? aentence ts limttedy hogqver, by the Lessof': right to èxcludp from

the unit wh.

atpver square föo&age is neces:ary fot the instàilation of new water, waste, elèetrlcal and éentilation rikers.

lsixth Paragraph - Nlwi Th@ Noiï*t Rooplshall, ip addi. tion to

fare footdga set forth. hereiny inclpldq ihlt pùv+leon .pf

tthhee seqx:ieting parking lqt for a disiapce o/ Approxiàately tmontyfive (25) feàt extending.frop the ioiier buz*iding. Tho'Boiler

Room hay be ove-hded ki*hqen kuci qrea àhdpapproprtate fences

eredted . '

'K

.

.

.

.

. . . (sevpnth Paragraph - Newl The 12th floù,r nna roof uiit shai:

have, in addition to the vtili.

zakion of the'roof, the rkght to

xtend structures upon Yhe'Voof or ab'ovà eh- saxe

construct or e ' wx-mv eo time fbà pevma-tte; upder

to the extent .that may ftom

applicabie Aaw . ''

CHAHGE: IN PRXCESe LAVOUT & SIZE LP UNlTs

.

. . .

. ,.

'

(Pirst Paragraphl In order to meet possible ve ing dlmand fvr

nmlx-'r and type of Im ltsy or to meet pxr4nsic'ular reqm'rements of

'nprospe- a'vo purchàsers..or for apy other çeo gps. thé sponsor rethe right at 'any r'a'me and f.

rom ti!ie io time fefora and

serves'declqrH g the Plax eèfective withod: the consen: of the'

aBfotaerrd of Directors or .bthe: tenantvsh.am Eolde..rs toz (i) chlnge

thq iayout of the Umits, (a'i! changq t.he 'pm m h.-w pf.Units by 'subdiyt4ing one or more Unitl into geparatelnn4-ts or coàbinihg sèparqt.

Unats.in'to one or hore Units and tiii!'chlnnce the size of Units bv sùbdivtdfn: or comblnlng Units as aforesaid or by altering the '

bcundary eaiie of Uhata or otherwiee. If the aize o# a Vnit is

changed either ag a' resqlt of ank said sùbdivislop, coe inatiopz

alteration of bounaau wails or qthew lsùe the nlvmhe/ 'ok pharea .

llocqked 'to'auch Unît mly be increaamd 6r aoereaoed .accorA pgly.

tIo Guch reaAldcation of aharor. ho-evety'viil increase pr Gegrease

the totaA n1- her of sh'ar-s ailoqated to i:l Units tn the pùiiding,

nor shall any shapes be kealiocated unl'ek's ln independenk'quali1. .

fied real estate consultv

ant ls of the opa,n?oa khat thè aforesaid

reaspnabie telationship is presèrved (asldeterminèd oh the dqte'

the change ip'màde). Any reaiiocàtion :* siares will v:yy tha.

estïmated mont.hly m'nl*ntenénce charg@l /o/ the Upit or U.nlts

affected thereby frpm the Amounts'in thè uscheéule of Upitrpr

hoWever. such a changd shall not lffect gthe proporelon ob nmnupt

o'f maintenauce charges to be paid rby pu/chasers Mf Uniks Which .

.

are nQt the Gublect of auch change. Ani .change Xn YVG Dimea

2.

Case 9:22-cv-81780-DMM Document 8 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/29/2022 Page 30 of 34
hares allocattd

in the nnmher - 5 layout or nnmher Jnità Or rovided. ament to thekelan ; P

thereto NAN. ùe made withouE aïsennthe size or ï'ayout ö: a unit

however, that (i) any chanqe h . u a notkce affixed aser thereof Y

thall be disclosed to the PRrC of Làw f this *1an (ss) the bàpartmqn:

to tip inside cover o e,ived a cop:.oé such nokice, f the state of uq* York has rec ffsxed to

V thereàfter be a 6f Such hPYid* ShR11 d

and (iii) a copy aeaa to iny party who hA the insidi covpr of lach Plan Prese

l n Prior to the aforesaid éhangel.

not teceived a P @

(/ifkh.paragyaph! A purchasey will not be Jexcused from purchasing hi: Unit kE the dimensione of his Qnit vary frpm the

plans set foyth heyeih by less tN.n five Peâcent and w1l1 n:t

have any claim against the Sponsork .elcept ihat any diàinution

in the squarl footage resulting from the inktallation ôf new . water, wwste, p lectrlcal and ventilation riàers shall not dffect

the purchasem's obli/ation tp purchaMe his Unit . A11 Euch vork

shall be performed by the Tenant-shareholde/s 'Corporation ât

khe expense of the Tenant-shareholders,ehl/h expense shàll,in'

Eurne be borne by the Lessees propottionately.

feirst Paragràph) Any person who desitee Yopurchdse shakes of the

Cooperative an4 the attendant right to a P/oprietaty Leasp wilA

be requixed to execute d Subscription,Agpedolnt in the form that

has been appended hereto at page 101. An ëxecuEed.'subscriptipn

Agreement woqld be fnvnished Eo the Sùonsor together with à Qheck

representing iEe down payment khich check kould be drawn to

the order of Bachher. Tqlly & Mnntell as Eécrow agents fot

3lpt stkeet ReaAty A/soclates.

PRocEp#;E To PUACHASE

OPTION TO PURCHAEE

Lessoe has an option t.

o purchase the iapd yné building for the

sum of $l.0p at any time dnring the tetm p: the Grouhd Liase.

* .

.

suMMx'nv oe PiopàxsTxny LEASE

' .

I

(Para:raph Four - Newl The Pröprietary Leape may vary'from

Tenant to Tenant based upon the usp to whibh the Unlt'is put.

,UNSOLD SWANNS

(Third Paragraphl spopsor shall have the right to change the

layoutr sizè and numher 'of Units as provided in the sedtiop enEleé ''Ga'anges in Prigesy rayout & Size pif uniEse hereih.

'.ti

œ

'

)

IDENU U -(lF.--T#E PARTIES

I#irst Paragraph) Sponsor is a partnership formed ln the state

'

y.J . . *- ,- j . r Qs New York for the gurpose of purdhaslng ithe Property a:

4$:0 West 31st s/reet, New York. New'York, a.nd for the putpos@

of presenting this offering- The principii asset- of the parthip are the fee title to th@ land ahd lbûilding and ownèarm

anherzpg of aAI of ehe ahares of capitai atoci-of tho Tenant '

Corporatiôh. . '

<...J< .

Case 9:22-cv-81780-DMM Document 8 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/29/2022 Page 31 of 34
j

'

bOCUMEN''S ON FITW ' r th. tjenlralk tson 353-e(9)( Q .#@.

lh accordahte W th S@çk ù tywpsjïwelah ë4ê Cöo/ i ering à a a to ps of Yhis Of i;= rqfeete Bugïàiss Lak, doP sbi.

ts or documàh . u ow m ja al1 Mxh . tiveotgeùnïA@ snsppctkonw:pjospyetive#zurz-suqa Aàreiq s all be.avàiïable fOr urchastd sp o cùasqrwEo shàlï'haYé P jgekilg

aho ets 4nd by M Y P w atticxpatù'd in7%hé 0 . d by iilx. PlàZ Em S aj.t have p(: g j a pzkeys,' uff1r@ . tx ponsor!sqa x i e ofjice.p k uev :ot # ofàhuc smçpFitiKs'at y a<cThird Avèhue?ïiek Y4r:eeryoa of,

aac nar1,1Tlkle).yat&a MaavBallé'lah!li zor.sqcu saspection 'for t7 .

. Fto #b&xk:

sx> Yt .

Am ö- r #q# spfN oR

d Ehe l1* firm ôf sponsor h. @s rp%aine k xs cqpnsel- . ozk uow :or , ajb Tu rd lvenuei ftàw X ' up av- rkoap.

Manteil.: zaaxs, ij5n A/phù:)gf l.L

(The lak tirp 6% Baskin & ha xrtidaay ef Inpqp- zjwa o e :By-ii#ws. t :, j o ar

zk# xqv Yotk tIrP . #.

.

New Yp a w o ase ,jqna al o

yoratiohy stzbscFi/tion vzpewqntr .: o e Ypnant c1xpovau on.)

suu goo nu oh :

doc% enkg reievant tö ùz) tea àt.qlosih: W

.y bo rppte:np saer

@he .rlpapt côo orltiöx : u xk shoàld 'hot çVtm

.é tw ,G e ltèhaht-m F ora s? a ounpei. QonxtA e!l i t bu sts xnaypoxd:nt coue el ,R

épchherz Tal1# & lV ntei :9 iipsr,oïm Gpllnxel' ' yjmua.a gqasjtit xzth

èrospàdEiv: Ptlrctm sV:r wcorporiG on. rnih: ttae tenlnp . 'oh a1l W tteri dQh.C :

Bacùpèze.'*412,1: :

CENENAL -

xyjym saru: w tw. offeru : ,bian * ; uv

feoutth Pv agrapù! Thisvu ïasn xvaw,'e o: tlhp .M exipapr #

1aw fi% of. o sxkh & :*a y u zteounsil ta twe

vokk. xé# Y>+k ' Which 1@W ykrp ss.ho lqpage yag

. rptaipqa G @

sor.has subaoquerw % xozx ,

sPonsor hqrehihner,ëz sTtAmIplY i Xantezf' gsn Thazrd Avqnue.New

fz> pf Bàd

u.% York. a/ iG Cthtmàekl.

susse pm oë Atip- t

Ne ordèt of bachtm x'

* wit.h 1* mY dh*cx YO Y ètparagre h MAJ #X% axst sG eet AGAA.W M @**

: ' tel.l A%'MGCrdV XVM Y YOX T

:lly : Mnn èxe above statpq bown PiYpenx'z

.

. fop U A % oupt of , èzveatxv.. .g hezlip ' cmate h jj pzap blcom.. 'agree t at, if and aft*r t:'v: stàt4d balaim e'9y the satd

provided, I < 11 pày Ehé:.AM ; , u ae ahd dmmnnd jk ajtar wxitt4zg sp .u u gu Putc lsa szaap wivuan.fiftëen Ray: jklojï q - - wna vpovxunre coa oratxop tw .., :

by' sscpow Agehty SponsoF Q:r u**- *--- *'- m-*thas bewq:sp/cified ata o: plosing G tlq) to sa by.

Shalï seatq thai tlie d eh pavpent

Eo b* ppY latet #han /0 Q.YYX YY XO ZYYeYlwIp'k'Varakrtop a Nek/ Yprk

P@rsonal ceNtifie: eheé.zk or oftxçiaizty aksociitesr. ana vitly z

ank tb the ordyt öf 3 st streit.Rea sa ù b riini: ptoyp tl# u/ pk yatax.y xaase *p* sa . xtw vxcx.ow

Wi;.1 sigjz tho ***** taihya ïp thë P'an- e iw vtzp rom g4n uuaw xwp sjkayx

PVeseptation tö .m u e: éhikpof

agent l kv: mq pW mtht writt@n no r , #il.1. g j.s appnaohea.. effectle Or either begomes

q

Case 9:22-cv-81780-DMM Document 8 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/29/2022 Page 32 of 34
Iparagrap.h 4A! The Spönsor will hold all myn)os received by

it through its agents or employees ip trust zntil actûllly

i niof the transaction

employed in conneetion with the eonsummat o .

as provided in section 352-h of %he deneral Susiness Law. All .

such monïps will he depos'iked in a nlnxiptexkst.bearlng aceoùqt

with Bani Leumi Trûat colpany of NeW Yqrk a<d will be held in

the Escrok Account tefefred to above. The Eundy so deposited

kill be disbursed ônly at the ciosing and olly for ehe purposes

of the consummation of this Plah or rekurned to me as herein Provided .

'

lsigndture binel Baclm er, Tally & Mànteèlk as Escm w Agent

:

w

'

''

f àt 450 Wëst 31St . h ot the Prèllis@s . . 'P e offering Plan ' . .

sCtreet is effective - ,gJ.

è-,

N3...- .

$#k...w

.%

.

;'...x. - .M''*

p

'

;.'

.N'.<

F

Case 9:22-cv-81780-DMM Document 8 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/29/2022 Page 33 of 34
PRESS I iiil/1 Jll!MPilm. Retail .~l l:z!' PR10R1TY MAIL 

POSTAGE PAID ' . ~ POSTAGE REQUIRE 

P 

US PRESS FIRMLY TO SEAL FLAT RATE ENVELOI 

$13 55 ~~~~;;2~8736 '. - ------:---~-----_:,____:_:.c___--

■ 3347700829-10 : 

sr---L=PR=1-=-o=RI_T_YM_A_IL_® ___ ~ :o RI TY® . ~ IAIL 

0 Lb 7.00 Oz , 

■ Expecte 

■ Most do 

1!1 USPST1 

EXPECTED DELIVERY DAY : 11/28/22 

RDC 04 ! 

I 

,trictions apply}."' 

IC02BI at destinations. 

1uired. 

tations of coverage. 

y._ ' ' I 

I 

TRAv~n::~-.a;;;;;;a;;r~ _. ~--_ ;::_::_:::I",=· ·•=""'=-~--~~-::_-::_-::-::~;_~~~ule ;;canfree theQR Package code. Pickup, 

I\ 111!1\ Ill \111\11111111\tl 11\ll \ 11\ 

PS00001000014 

EP14F May 2020 ~- ~ - J ·- - • · -

TO: . 

Case 9:22-cv-81780-DMM Document 8 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/29/2022 Page 34 of 34