Court Opinion

ID: 9959928
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-04-12 20:12:44.944828+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:18:59.873690
License: Public Domain

Caelen Invs. LLC v Notias
               2024 NY Slip Op 31167(U)
                      April 5, 2024
           Supreme Court, New York County
        Docket Number: Index No. 654142/2020
                  Judge: Joel M. Cohen
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. 654142/2020
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 228                                                                                             RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/05/2024

            SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
            COUNTY OF NEW YORK: COMMERCIAL DIVISION PART 03M
            ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- X

                CAELENINVESTMENTSLLC                                                                INDEX NO.         654142/2020

                                                          Plaintiff,
                                                                                                    MOTION DATE        07/17/2023
                                                - V -
                                                                                                    MOTION SEQ. NO.        008
                NIKOLAOS NOTIAS,

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

            HON. JOEL M. COHEN:

            The following e-filed documents, listed by NYSCEF document number (Motion 008) 169, 170, 171, 172,
            173, 174, 175, 176, 177, 178, 179, 180, 181, 194, 197, 198,199,206,207,208,210,212,213,214,
            215,216,217,218,219,220,221,222,223,224
                                                                       ATTORNEY'S FEES AND COSTS AFTER SUMMARY
            were read on this motion for
                                                                                     JUDGMENT

                      Plaintiff Caelen Investments LLC' s ("Plaintiff') application for costs and fees in the

            amount of $838,414.56 is granted in part in the amount of $700,000.00.

                      By order dated December 20, 2023 (NYSCEF 212 [Transcript], 214 [Order]), the Court

            granted Plaintiffs renewed motion for summary judgment against Defendant Nikolas Notias

            ("Defendant") for breach of a Loan Agreement ("Agreement" [NYSCEF 215]). The Court

            awarded fees "limited to the claim on which judgment is being granted" (Tr. At 28) and granted

            Plaintiff leave to "submit its application for costs and fees provided for under the parties

            agreement. .. " 1

                      Plaintiff now seeks attorney's fees and costs in the amount of $838,414,56, consisting of

            $818,391.00 in fees and $20,023.56 in costs. Defendant argues that a substantial reduction is

            1
             Section 14.02 provides that Defendant "shall pay all costs and expenses relating to negotiating,
            preparing, executing, enforcing, paying or extinguishing this Agreement. .. "

                654142/2020 CAELEN INVESTMENTS LLC vs. NOTIAS, NIKOLAOS                                                 Page 1 of4
                Motion No. 008

[* 1]                                                                       1 of 4
                                                                                                    INDEX NO. 654142/2020
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 228                                                                     RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/05/2024

            warranted because Plaintiff has not established an entitlement to fees under Greek law; because

            litigating in Athens would have been less expensive; because there is no proof of payment of the

            alleged amounts incurred; because certain billed time is non-compensable; and because certain

            claims are unsupported or the relevant time entries are redacted.

                   Defendant's objections pertaining to Greek law and Plaintiff's election to bring its claims

            in New York are rejected. With respect to Greek law, the Court awarded costs and fees in the

            Order, and that holding is the law of the case (PHH Mtge. Corp. v Burt, 176 AD3d 1242, 1243

            [2d Dept 2019] [collecting cases]). With respect to Plaintiff's choice to file this action in New

            York, Section 19.05 of the Agreement provides that "[t]he courts of the place of execution of this

            Agreement shall have jurisdiction for any action or dispute arising therefrom, as well as the

            courts of Athens, to whose concurrent jurisdiction the parties submit under this Agreement."

            The Agreement was executed in New York and Plaintiff appropriately relied on the Agreement's

            forum selection clause (Sterling Nat. Bank as Assignee of NorVergence, Inc. v E. Shipping

            Worldwide, Inc., 35 AD3d 222,223 [1st Dept 2006]).

                   Defendant's remaining objections warrant deductions, but not in the amounts proposed.

            When considering an application for costs and fees, "the court always has the authority and

            responsibility to determine that the claim for fees is reasonable" (Solow Mgt. Corp. v Tanger, 19

            AD3d 225,226 [1st Dept 2005]). Among the factors to be considered are the "time and labor

            required, the difficulty of the questions involved, and the skill required to handle the problems

            presented; the lawyer's experience, ability and reputation; the amount involved and benefit

            resulting to the client from the services; the customary fee charged by the Bar for similar

            services; the contingency or certainty of compensation; the results obtained; and the

            responsibility involved" (In re Freeman's Estate, 34 NY2d 1, 9 [1974][citations omitted]).

             654142/2020 CAELEN INVESTMENTS LLC vs. NOTIAS, NIKOLAOS                                Page 2 of 4
             Motion No. 008

[* 2]                                                     2 of 4
                                                                                                    INDEX NO. 654142/2020
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 228                                                                       RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/05/2024

                   Defendant's contention that no proof of payment has been provided is rejected. Counsel

            for Plaintiff, Mr. DiBlasi, submitted an affirmation providing that "Plaintiff has paid all of the

            attorneys' fees that are reflected in the annexed Costs Schedule up through September 30, 2023,

            and all invoices since that date have been recently billed to Plaintiff and Holland & Knight is

            awaiting payment" (NYSCEF 213 iJl0).

                   The Court has discretion to apply the relevant factors, and "an award of attorneys' fees

            does not require success at all stages of the litigation" (542 E. 14th St. LLC v Lee, 66 AD3d 18,

            24 [l st Dept 2009]). Plaintiff is clearly the prevailing party in this action, and the Court finds

            that the majority of Plaintiff's counsel's efforts were relevant to successfully enforcing the

            Agreement and are therefore compensable. That said, Defendant correctly notes that Plaintiff's

            motion for summary judgment in lieu of a complaint was unsuccessful (Index No. 652537 /2020)

            as was its motion to appoint a receiver (NYSCEF 113). Plaintiff was not the prevailing party in

            the 652537 proceeding and is not entitled to associated fees for that matter. Defendant is also

            correct that a limited number of time entries are duplicative, unrelated to the Agreement, or

            premature. Having considered the record as a whole, the Court finds that a deduction of

            approximately 15% is warranted (Arabesque Rec., LLC v Capacity, LLC, 2013 WL 606036

            [N.Y. Sup Ct, New York County 2013] [collecting cases]).

                   Accordingly, itis

                   ORDERED that Plaintiff's application for reasonable costs and fees, including attorney's

            fees, is GRANTED IN PART and Plaintiff is awarded Seven Hundred Thousand Dollars

            ($700,000.00) in costs and fees; it is further

                   ORDERED that Plaintiff re-submit its proposed judgment to conform to this order and

            submit a courtesy copy in Word format to sfc-part3@nycourts.gov within five (5) days.

             654142/2020 CAELEN INVESTMENTS LLC vs. NOTIAS, NIKOLAOS                                 Page 3 of 4
             Motion No. 008

[* 3]                                                        3 of 4
                                                                                                    INDEX NO. 654142/2020
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 228                                                                         RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/05/2024

                    This constitutes the decision and order of the Court.

                     4/5/2024
                      DATE                                                        JOEL M. COHEN, J.S.C.

                                     ~                                ~
             CHECK ONE:                  CASE DISPOSED                    NON-FINAL DISPOSITION

                                                         □ DENIED
                                                                                                   □
                                         GRANTED                          GRANTED IN PART              OTHER

             APPLICATION:                SETTLE ORDER                     SUBMIT ORDER

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

             654142/2020 CAELEN INVESTMENTS LLC vs. NOTIAS, NIKOLAOS                                Page4 of 4
             Motion No. 008

[* 4]                                                      4 of 4