Court Opinion

ID: 9947047
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-03-01 21:09:14.138562+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:25:45.801416
License: Public Domain

CGM-LLNR LLC v Sylvia Wald & Po Kim Art
                         Gallery
               2024 NY Slip Op 30609(U)
                   February 27, 2024
           Supreme Court, New York County
        Docket Number: Index No. 153910/2017
                  Judge: Lyle E. Frank
Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip
 Op 30001(U), are republished from various New York
 State and local government sources, including the New
  York State Unified Court System's eCourts Service.
 This opinion is uncorrected and not selected for official
                       publication.
                                                                                                                        INDEX NO. 153910/2017
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 409                                                                                             RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/27/2024

            SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
            COUNTY OF NEW YORK: PART I IM
            ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- X

             CGM-LLNR LLC,                                                                          INDEX NO.         153910/2017

                                                          Plaintiff,
                                                                                                    MOTION DATE        08/09/2023
                                                - V -
                                                                                                    MOTION SEQ. NO.        013
             THE SYLVIA WALD AND PO KIM ART GALLERY,

                                                          Defendant.
                                                                                                     DECISION+ ORDER ON
                                                                                                           MOTION
            ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- X

             THE SYLVIA WALD AND PO KIM ART GALLERY                                                             Third-Party
                                                                                                          Index No. 595488/2020
                                                          Third-Party Plaintiff,

                                                  -against-

             EPSTEIN ENGINEERING P.C., and BELLET
             CONSTRUCTION CO., INC.,

                                                         Third-Party Defendant.
             -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- X

             -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- X

               BELLET CONSTRUCTION CO. INC,                                                                      Third-Party
                                                                                                           Index No. 595488/2020
                                                         Second Third-Party Plaintiff,

                                                   -against-

               ONLY PROPERTIES, LLC,

                                                        Second Third-Party Defendant.
               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- X

            The following e-filed documents, listed by NYSCEF document number (Motion 013) 288,289,290, 291,
            292,293,294,295,296,297,298,299,300,301,302,303,304,305,306,307,308,309,310,311,
            312,313,314,315,316,317,379,380,391,394,395,396
            were read on this motion to/for                                             JUDGMENT - SUMMARY

             153910/2017 CGM-LLNR LLC vs. SYLVIA WARD AND PO KIM                                                        Page 1 of 5
             Motion No. 013

                                                                            1 of 5
[* 1]
                                                                                                  INDEX NO. 153910/2017
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 409                                                                     RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/27/2024

               Upon the foregoing documents, third-party defendant Epstein Engineering's motion for

            summary judgment is granted in its entirety.

               The Court agrees that Epstein has demonstrated prima facie entitlement to summary

           judgment. In support of its motion, the Epstein relies on an affidavit from its principal Alan

            Epstein, emails between its principal Mr. Epstein and representatives of the third-party plaintiff

            the Sylvia Wald and Po Kim Art Gallery, as well as deposition testimony from Wayne Bellet, the

            Co-defendant Bellet's principal and Hyong T. Cho, president and chairman of the board of the

            Sylvia Wald Gallery. In opposition, the Wald Gallery has failed to provide any affidavits or

            other evidence in response to the affidavit and other evidence in support of Epstein's motion.

               I.        Breach of engineering contracts

                    In its third-party complaint, the Gallery alleges Epstein breached its engineering contracts

            by failing to perform its contractual duties which then caused significant delay in the

            performance of repair work, overcharges, increased construction costs, and directly increased the

            delay in the Wald Gallery's performance of its duties under various contracts and license

            agreement.

                    Epstein disputes the Gallery's allegations and contends that it completed all its

            contractual obligations and further, that any delay was created by the adjacent building 415

            Lafayette, and the Wald Gallery itself. As such, Epstein moves for summary judgment

            dismissing the Wald Gallery's breach of contract claim. In support of its motion, Epstein relies

            on the affidavit of its principal Mr. Epstein, who states that Epstein engineering inspected the

            building fa9ade of the gallery and filed the local 11 report with the DOB as required in the

            contract. Mr. Epstein states that Epstein performed all of its contractual duties, and had no

            involvement in the issues, such as lack of access to the adjacent building, that is contends

             153910/2017 CGM-LLNR LLC vs. SYLVIA WARD AND PO KIM                                  Page 2 of 5
             Motion No. 013

                                                           2 of 5
[* 2]
                                                                                                      INDEX NO. 153910/2017
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 409                                                                         RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/27/2024

            contributed to the delay in the project. Moreover, Mr. Epstein contends that part way through

            the project, the Wald Gallery switched contractors and hired the other third-party defendant

            Bellet Construction Co., which it alleges further caused a delay in the project.

                      Additionally, Epstein points to the deposition testimony of Wayne Bellet. When asked

            "Do you believe that Epstein Engineering caused any of the delay of this project?" Mr. Bell et

            responded, "No." Moreover, Epstein further points to the president and chairman of the board of

            the Ward Gallery who testified that it was the building owner of 415 Lafayette Street who caused

            the delay.

                      In opposition, the Wald Gallery fails to address Epstein's arguments nor raise a triable

            issue of fact. The Wald Gallery's conclusory denial to parts of Epstein's statement of material

            facts is not sufficient to create a triable issue of fact. As plaintiff has failed to provide evidence in

            opposition and failed to raise a triable issue of fact, defendant Epstein is entitled to summary

           judgment dismissing plaintiffs breach of contract claim.

                II.      Professional negligence

                      Epstein contends the Wald Gallery utterly failed to produce any evidence of professional

            negligence. In his affidavit Mr. Epstein contends that different representatives of the Wald

            Gallery executed several contracts with Epstein Engineering during the five years that the project

            at 417 Lafayette Street continued, and that Wald Gallery never lodged any complaints against

            Epstein Engineering during the 14 years between 2006, when Wald Gallery first retained the

            firm, until 2020, when the Wald Gallery terminated the contract between the parties.

                      In opposition, again the Wald Gallery simply "denies" Epstein's version of events but

            supports its denial with no evidence and raises no specific triable issue of fact. Therefore, the

            Wald Gallery's claim for professional negligence against Epstein is dismissed.

             153910/2017 CGM-LLNR LLC vs. SYLVIA WARD AND PO KIM                                      Page 3 of 5
             Motion No. 013

                                                            3 of 5
[* 3]
                                                                                                   INDEX NO. 153910/2017
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 409                                                                      RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/27/2024

               III.      Indemnification

                      Next, Epstein moves to dismiss the Wald Gallery's claim for indemnification, on the

            basis that it has established it was not responsible for the delays which are the basis of the

            underlying action against the Wald Gallery. In opposition, the Wald Gallery merely responds,

            "there is no doubt or issue of fact that Epstein failed to perform under the subject contracts and in

            liable to defendant/third-party defendant Wald in the form of common law indemnity." Without

            any supporting evidence to substantiate this claim, such a conclusory statement is not sufficient

            to defeat Epstein's motion for summary judgment. The Court finds the Wald Gallery has failed

            to raise any triable issue of fact and as such its claim for common law indemnification against

            Epstein is dismissed.

               IV.       Contribution and Breach of Insurance Procurement

                      Lastly, in support of its position seeking dismissal of the Ward Gallery's contribution and

            breach of contract claims, Epstein contends that its contracts did not require the company to

            name the Wald Gallery as an additional insured or otherwise provide insurance coverage for the

            Wald Gallery. Moreover, Epstein contends the Wald Gallery has failed to address this in its

            motion papers and therefore has abandoned its claims for contribution and breach of insurance

            procurement. Rodriguez v Dormitory Auth. of the State ofN.Y., 104 A.D.3d 529 [2013].

            Vermette v. Kenworth Truck Co., 68 N.Y.2d 714 [1986]. Josephson LLC v Column Fin., Inc., 94

            A.D.3d 479 [2012].

                      The Court agrees. The Wald Gallery has submitted no evidence in support of its claims,

            has failed to address Epstein's arguments in its opposition papers, and thus its claims for

            Contribution and Breach of Insurance Procurement must be dismissed.

                      Accordingly, it is hereby

             153910/2017 CGM-LLNR LLC vs. SYLVIA WARD AND PO KIM                                    Page 4 of 5
             Motion No. 013

                                                            4 of 5
[* 4]
                                                                                                 INDEX NO. 153910/2017
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 409                                                                      RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/27/2024

                    ADJUDGED that third-party defendant's motion for summary judgment is granted in its

            entirety; and it is further

                    ORDERED that the Clerk is directed to enter judgment dismissing the third-party

            complaint as against EPSTEIN ENGINERING P.C. accordingly.

                    2/27/2024
                      DATE                                                      LYLE E. FRANK, J.S.C.
             CHECK ONE:                   CASE DISPOSED                NON-FINAL DISPOSITION

                                          GRANTED         □ DENIED     GRANTED IN PART          □ OTHER
             APPLICATION:                 SETTLE ORDER                 SUBMIT ORDER

             CHECK IF APPROPRIATE:        INCLUDES TRANSFER/REASSIGN   FIDUCIARY APPOINTMENT    □ REFERENCE

             153910/2017 CGM-LLNR LLC vs. SYLVIA WARD AND PO KIM                                 Page 5 of 5
             Motion No. 013

                                                            5 of 5
[* 5]