### Libertas Funding LLC v CDM Plumbing Inc 2024 NY Slip Op 30909(U) March 19, 2024 Supreme Court, Kings County Docket Number: Index No. 534890/2023 Judge: LeonRuchelsman Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip

Op30001(U), are republished from various New York State and local governmentsources, including the New

York State Unified Court System's eCourtsService. This opinion is uncorrected and not selected for official publication.

### FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 03/19/2024 04:24 PM INDEX NO. 534890/2023 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 45 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/19/2024

1 of 4 

### SUPREME 

### COURT OF THE STATE.OF NEW 

### YORK COUNTY OF ~INGS: CiVIL tERM! COMMERCIAL PART 8

..,----·-----·-·-------,--------.. --.-.---·--· ---x· LIBERTAS FUN.DING 

### LLC~ Plaintiff, Decision 

### and order



### - against
- tnde~

## N¢. 5l4ijjO/2-023 CDM PLUMBING 

### INC OBA ROTO-ROOTER; CDM WATER

### RESTORATION INC and 

### MICHAEL THOMAS MERZ; DALE 

### ANN- MERZ·, 

### Defendants, 

### March 19, 2024



### -------- ~-- .- . --- ~----~-----~·. - .· --...x 'PRESENT: HON. LEON RUCI:IELSMAN Motion Seq.. 

### #1


### The plaintiff has 

### moved seeking summaryjudgement pursuant t.,q 

### CPL·R §3212.argu.ing 

### th.eie are nci questions 

### ot·fact ·the 

### d,efendants owe 

## the money sought. The plaintiff has also moved ·s·eeking

### to dismiss 

### defendant's counterclaims. The de:feI1dants 

### h,ave opposedtilce rnotion,s. Papers 

### we.re submitted by the 

### pa,rties 

### and afte.r reviewing 

### all the arguments thi.s court 

### now makes the 

### follo:wing determination .. On Mc!.Y 10, 2023 and September 6, 2023,-the

### piaintiff a, 

### merchant 

### cash 

### adv.ance funding provider entered 

### into 

### contracts ·with 

### de·fendants who reside irt 

### Texa-s. Pursuant to th~ a

### gre.ements 

### the plaintiff 

### purchased $325,QbO of defendant's 

### future receivable for $250,00'0 and $'130;.0-00 of defen.dartt's- 

### future receivabl:·es fo.r $13,0,,000. The 

### defendants...gμaranteed tp.e a.9r.1;=em:ents" 

### The 

### plaintiff asserts 

### the 

### defe-ridants stopped rerilittanc~s
_ in 

### November 2023 arid now owe· $214·,313'.

### 6-5. Furthe.r, the_.plaintiff assert~. the 

### defendant.breached 

### the agreement PYby 

### changing the designated barik account without 

### Plaintiff's authorization and by placing 

### a



### [* 1]

### FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 03/19/2024 04:24 PM INDEX NO. 534890/2023 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 45 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/19/2024

2 of 4 

### s.top

### payment on the· account. This 

### --action was ·c6mrnenc.ed an,d now 

### thepl_aintiff seeks surpmary 

### judgement 

### arguing there 

### can: be 

### no questions of fact the 

### defendants owe

## the amount 

### outstanding and j_udgernent should·b:e granted in 

### the,ir favor. The defE:mdan_t:s 

### oppose

## tnemotion arguing there 

### are questions of fact which 

### p-reclude a 

## suinmary· determination at 

### this 

### time.·
Conclusions of Law 

### Where: 

### the material 

### facts at issue in a ca.se are in 

### dispute surtuna.ty judgment 

### cannot be 

### granted (Zuckerman 

### v. City of 

### New York, 

### 4"9 NYS2d 557, 427 NYS2"d 595 [1980]). Gen·erally, it is for 

### .thejury, the t:i:-ier of f:act to determine the legal c·a-use ·o_"f any 

### injury, however, 

### wht=re only one conclusion may be drawn 

## from the £_-acts then the 

### question of 

### leg-al cause ma"y be= decided by·the trial: 

### court as 

### a matter. 

### of 1-aw (Marino v·. 

### Jamison, 189-·Ao.3-d 1021_, 

### i36 NYS3d 324 [2d.Dept., 2021). 

### Concerning establishing- 

## any default,. it 

### is w,ell sett;led tl'J.at "a.proper foundation for the admission of a business record 

### must be provided by someone with personal.knowledge of the maker·'

### s- business practices ,and

### proc_edur(;;S" (Cit.iban"k N.

### A. v .

.Cabrera, 130 AD3d 861, 14 NYS3d 420 [2d Dept.., 2015]). Thus, 

### where a party introduces evioencie= of'the ex.isteri.ce of J,.oans, pe;rsoncal guaran_t:.ees- and the defendant's failure to make payments according to the. terms of the ins_truments then summary judgement
2



### [* 2]

### FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 03/19/2024 04:24 PM INDEX NO. 534890/2023 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 45 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/19/2024

3 of 4 is proper (see, JPMorgan Chase BankN.A., v. Bauer, 

### 92 AD3d 

### 641, 938 NYS2d 190 [2d Dept., 2012]). In this case the plaintiff submittedthe affidavit of Ricky Palaci'o a customer service representative of the plaintiff. 

### He stated that he reviewed the plaintiff's records in connection with the loans extended inthis
case. He further stated that all the documents he reviewedwere maintained 

### in the regular course of business and all such records
were made near their occurrence with someone who had knowledge at that time and that the plaintiff's standardpractice is to keep suchrecords in the. ordinary course of l:msiness. Thus, the plaintiff has established the admissibility of the records relied upon since Mr. Palacio had knowledge 

### and familiarity of the plaintiff's practic:;es and procedures (see, Cadlerock Joint Venture L.P. 

### v. Trombley:, 150 AD3d 957, 54 NYSJd 127 [2d Dept., 2017]), The specific record in support of the motion seeking sμmmary

. . judgement is remittance payment statements which demonstrates that certai.n payments due were never.£orwarded to the plaintiff (see; NYSCEF Doc. No. 4 and Doc. No. 5) . Therefore, the proper .foundation for the admission of such document has been provided by Mr. Palacio who establish familiarity with the record keeping pr_actices of the plaintiff (~; JPMorgan Chase Bank N.A.• v. Rads Grbtip Inc,, 88 AD3d 766, 

### 930 NYS2d 89,9 [2dDept., 2011]). Therefore, the plaintiff established its entitlement to
3


# --------------------------------------------········-·--···-· [* 3]

### FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 03/19/2024 04:24 PM INDEX NO. 534890/2023 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 45 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/19/2024

4 of 4 summary judgement. The defendants insist the plaintiff has failed to eliminate all questions of fact. However, upon the presentation of the evidence noted above, the plaintiff has s·ufficiently demonstrated funds were given to the de·fendants and such funds have not been fully returned. The rernittence payments along with the affidavit of Mr. Palacio are sufficient to eliminate all questions of fact in this regard. Further, although the defendants allude tothe fact the contract is not valid oh the grounds of usury they make
no such substantive arguments in oppositionto the motion seeking summary judgement. Therefor.e, based on the foregoing, the motion seeking summary judgernent is granted. So ordered.

DATED: March 19, 2024 Brooklyn N.Y, ENTER:

Hon. Leon Ruch· llSC

4



### [* 4]