Court Opinion

ID: 9947659
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-03-05 15:10:51.453125+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:26:38.974245
License: Public Domain

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE
                               APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION
        This opinion shall not "constitute precedent or be binding upon any court." Although it is posted on the
     internet, this opinion is binding only on the parties in the case and its use in other cases is limited. R. 1:36-3.

                                                        SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY
                                                        APPELLATE DIVISION
                                                        DOCKET NO. A-0415-22

RIVERVALE HOMES, LLC,

         Plaintiff-Respondent,

v.

AIDA SANTA LUCIA, a/k/a
AIDA ST. LUCIA, and KYLE
KHOROZIAN, a/k/a K.
VAROUJAN KHOROZIAN,

         Defendants/Third Party
         Plaintiffs-Appellants,

v.

RE/MAX PROPERTIES, COLIN
SOMERVILLE, RIVER VALE
PLANNING BOARD, and
BERGEN COUNTY CLERK,

     Third-Party Defendants-
     Respondents.
___________________________

                   Submitted February 5, 2024 – Decided March 5, 2024

                   Before Judges Gilson and Berdote Byrne.
            On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Law
            Division, Bergen County, Docket No. L-5345-18.

            Asatrian Law Group, LLC, attorneys for appellants
            (Martin V. Asatrian, of counsel and on the brief).

            Archer & Greiner, PC, attorneys for respondent
            (Michael J. Forino, on the brief).

PER CURIAM

      Kyle Khorozian, (Khorozian), appeals from the trial court's post-judgment

September 8, 2022 order denying his motion for a stay and/or recall of an arrest

warrant entered against him, granting plaintiff's cross-motion finding him in

contempt, and once again ordering his deposition. Khorozian argues he is not

competent to testify at a deposition. He also reiterates arguments alleging the

trial judge has a conflict of interest because his attorney, who began representing

him in this case after Khorozian's pleadings were stricken for failure to attend

the deposition, had a prior, unrelated matter against the trial judge.

      This is Khorozian's fourth appeal stemming from plaintiff's efforts to

enforce the sale of two residential real estate contracts. On April 24, 2023, we

considered these arguments fully in Khorozian's appeal of the trial judge's denial

of his motion for reconsideration, which was not consolidated with this appeal.

See Rivervale Homes, LLC v. Aida Santa Lucia (Rivervale I), No. A-3355-20

(App. Div. April 24, 2023) (slip op. at 4-6, 18-20). Thereafter, we affirmed the

                                                                            A-0415-22
                                        2
trial court's decision denying Khorozian's motion to recuse the trial judge and

cross-motion to prevent the sale of the property at issue. Rivervale Homes, LLC

v. Aida Santa Lucia, Nos. A-2945-21 and A-3136-21 (App. Div. June 27, 2023)

(slip op. at 2).

      For the reasons explained in our prior decisions, we conclude the trial

court did not err in denying Khorozian's motion for a stay and/or recall of an

arrest warrant entered against him, granting plaintiff's cross-motion finding

Khorozian in contempt, and compelling his deposition. We note this appeal is

duplicative of the arguments we addressed in Rivervale I and should have been

withdrawn after our decision was issued in April 2023. Further, the issue of the

stay is moot due to a subsequent court order entered by the trial court on

February 3, 2023, requiring Khorozian to post the amount of the judgment in

escrow, with which he complied, to stay the arrest warrant and the sale of the

property.

      Affirmed.

                                                                         A-0415-22
                                       3