Court Opinion

ID: 9966038
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-05-03 20:10:16.207502+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:24:49.698709
License: Public Domain

Antoniello v Faustina Corp.
               2024 NY Slip Op 31539(U)
                     April 30, 2024
           Supreme Court, New York County
        Docket Number: Index No. 604511/2005
                  Judge: Andrea Masley
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. 604511/2005
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 66                                                                                             RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/30/2024

            SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
            COUNTY OF NEW YORK: COMMERCIAL DIVISION PART 48
            -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------X
             PATRICIA ANTONIELLO INDIVIDUALLY AND ON                                               INDEX NO.         604511/2005
             BEHALF OF FAUSTINA CORPORATION, JOHN SIMEON
             INDIVIDUALLY AND ON BEHALF OF FAUSTINA
             CORPORATION, MARIE HORN INDIVIDUALLY AND ON                                           MOTION DATE             --
             BEHALF OF FAUSTINA CORPORATION, and FRANK
             GIAMMARINO INDIVIDUALLY AND ON BEHALF OF                                              MOTION SEQ. NO.        003
             FAUSTINA CORPORATION,

                                                         Plaintiffs,                                DECISION + ORDER ON
                                                                                                          MOTION
                                                -v-
             FAUSTINA CORPORATION AND JOHN DOE (1 - 10)
             INDIVIDUALLY AND AS SHAREHOLDERS, DIRECTORS,
             AGENTS AND OFFICERS, OF FAUSTINA
             CORPORATION, and ANTHONY SANTELMO,
             INDIVIDUALLY AND AS A DIRECTOR AND OFFICER OF
             FAUSTINA CORPORATION,

                                                         Defendants.
            -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------X

            HON. ANDREA MASLEY:

            The following e-filed documents, listed by NYSCEF document number (Motion 003) 40, 41, 42, 43, 44,
            45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65
            were read on this motion to/for                    PARTIES - ADD/SUBSTITUTE/INTERVENE              .

                      This 2005 action was restored to the calendar on October 23, 2023. (NYSCEF

            Doc. No. [NYSCEF] 29, Decision and Order at 1 [mot. seq. 002].)

                      Plaintiff John Simeon passed away on July 20, 2022. (NYSCEF 55, Death

            Certificate.)

                      For the reasons stated on the record on April 29, 2024, plaintiff’s motion pursuant

            to CPLR 1013 is granted to the extent that Janice Simeon-Ruddy and Vincent Santelmo

            may intervene in this action as plaintiffs. Vincent Santelmo owns 20 shares of the

            family corporation. (NYSCEF 45, Santelmo Feb. 29, 2024 aff ¶1.) The court rejects

            defendants’ objection that Vincent Santelmo fails to explain his delay in intervening in
             604511/2005 ANTONIELLO, PATRICIA vs. SANTELMO, ANTHONY                                                    Page 1 of 5
             Motion No. 003

                                                                           1 of 5
[* 1]
                                                                                              INDEX NO. 604511/2005
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 66                                                                   RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/30/2024

            this 2005 action. There is no such requirement in CPLR 1013 and there appears to be

            no delay or prejudice with his intervention. The court is allowing brief discovery as

            defendants requested which is necessary, in any case, in this 2005 case to refresh any

            prior discovery. Defendants admit that Simeon-Ruddy will have at least 10 shares and

            thus the corporation sent her a K-1. (NYSCEF __, April 29, 2024 tr __;1 NYSCEF 44,

            Simeon-Ruddy Feb. 27, 2024 aff ¶¶5-6.) Simeon-Ruddy’s application to substitute for

            her deceased father plaintiff John Simeon is denied. She is not the executor of her

            father’s New Jersey estate for which there appears to be no executor due to family

            squabbling. (NYSCEF __, April 29, 2024 tr __.) Simeon-Ruddy also makes this

            request to substitute for her father on behalf of her brother, but there is nothing in the

            record from the brother authorizing his sister to speak for him and it appears from

            argument that they are estranged. (NYSCEF 44, Simeon-Ruddy Feb. 27, 2024 aff ¶¶1,

            7.) Nevertheless, the shares appear to devolve to Simeon-Ruddy via the by-laws not

            her father’s will. Article VI section 2 of the By-Laws which address “TRANSFER OF

            SHARES” provides:

                      “The shares of the corporation shall be assignable and transferable on the books
                      of the corporation only to the natural and/or adopted children or the full-blooded
                      siblings of the registered owner, and only upon surrender of the certificate
                      endorsed with evidence of authority to transfer. No new certificate shall be
                      issued until the former certificate has been cancelled. The shares of the
                      corporation shall not be devisable by will, except as otherwise provided above.
                      In the event that the registered owner, or his or her transferee of share, as
                      provided herein, shall die without a surviving full-blooded sibling or natural and/or
                      adopted child, said shares shall revert to the corporation.” (NYSCEF 48,
                      September 9, 1989 By-Laws, Article VI Section 2.)

            1   Plaintiffs shall submit the transcript.
                604511/2005 ANTONIELLO, PATRICIA vs. SANTELMO, ANTHONY                        Page 2 of 5
                Motion No. 003

                                                             2 of 5
[* 2]
                                                                                            INDEX NO. 604511/2005
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 66                                                                 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/30/2024

                      Based on the By-Laws, defendants’ cross-motion pursuant to CPLR 1015(a) to

            void and nullify this court’s October 23, 2023 decision and order is denied. (NYSCEF

            29, Decision and Order [mot. seq. 002].) Even if defendants were correct, which they

            are not, the court was not divested of authority regarding the other plaintiffs in this

            action. Moreover, it appears from the By-Laws that John Simeon’s shares transfer is to

            his children not his estate. Further, defendants’ cross-motion is too late and improper.

            Defendants objected to plaintiffs’ motion 002 and lost. (Id.) Their remedy was to appeal

            or make a motion to renew and reargue within 30 days of the October decision.

                      Having determined that the movants and this action have a common question of

            law or fact and that intervention by the movants will not unduly delay the determination

            of the action or prejudice the substantial rights of any party, any more than it has been

            delayed already in this 2005 action, it is

                      ORDERED that the motion to intervene is granted and that Janice Simeon-

            Ruddy and Vincent Santelmo be permitted to intervene in the above-entitled action as a

            party plaintiffs; and it is further

                      ORDERED that defendants’ cross-motion to nullify and void this court’s October

            23, 2023 decision and order is denied based on the By-Laws; and it is further

                      ORDERED that plaintiffs shall submit the transcript to be so ordered; and it is

            further

                      ORDERED that the summons and complaint in this action be amended by

            adding Janice Simeon-Ruddy and Vincent Santelmo thereto as a party plaintiffs and

            listing Janice Simeon-Ruddy and Vincent Santelmo as the last plaintiffs in the caption;

            and it is further

             604511/2005 ANTONIELLO, PATRICIA vs. SANTELMO, ANTHONY                          Page 3 of 5
             Motion No. 003

                                                          3 of 5
[* 3]
                                                                                             INDEX NO. 604511/2005
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 66                                                                 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/30/2024

                   ORDERED that plaintiffs’ attempt to amend the complaint by attaching a

            proposed amended compliant to this motion is rejected. There is no notice of motion to

            amend. If plaintiffs wish to amend the complaint, they may file a motion to amend if

            they are so advised; and it is further

                   ORDERED that the attorney for the intervenors shall serve a copy of this order

            with notice of entry upon the Clerk of the Court and the Clerk of the General Clerk’s

            Office, who are directed to amend their records to reflect such change in the caption

            herein; and it is further

                   ORDERED that such service upon the Clerk of the Court and the Clerk of the

            General Clerk’s Office shall be made in accordance with the procedures set forth in the

            Protocol on Courthouse and County Clerk Procedures for Electronically Filed Cases

            (accessible at the “E-Filing” page on the court’s website)]; and it is further

                   ORDERED that parties are directed to submit a very brief discovery schedule by

            12 noon on May 3, 2024. The court will schedule a discovery conference if necessary.

            Since the note of issue was filed on January 10, 2011 (NYSCEF 19, Note of Issue), the

            time to file dispositive motions has expired. As soon as limited discovery is complete,

            the court will schedule a trial date; and it is further

                   ORDERED that the parties shall read and comply with the Commercial Division

            rules, Part 48 procedures, and use spell check. This means that the parties shall

            submit memoranda of law with tables of authorities and table of cases. Memoranda of

            law are not attorney affirmations and should not be written as such and are not a

            substitute for each other. The parties shall properly label their memoranda of law on the

            document itself and in NYSCEF. For example, the movant submits their memorandum

             604511/2005 ANTONIELLO, PATRICIA vs. SANTELMO, ANTHONY                          Page 4 of 5
             Motion No. 003

                                                          4 of 5
[* 4]
                                                                                                    INDEX NO. 604511/2005
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 66                                                                          RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/30/2024

            of law in support of motion to do whatever relief they are seeking and labels the

            memorandum of law as such. The opponent submits a memorandum of law in

            opposition and labels it as such. Labeling all memoranda of law as memoranda of law

            is confusing and useless. NYSCEF offers a wide variety of options for labeling

            memoranda of law and the court urges the parties to use those options.

                    4/30/2024
                      DATE                                                        ANDREA MASLEY, J.S.C.
             CHECK ONE:                 CASE DISPOSED                 X   NON-FINAL DISPOSITION

                                        GRANTED             DENIED    x   GRANTED IN PART             OTHER

             APPLICATION:               SETTLE ORDER                      SUBMIT ORDER

             CHECK IF APPROPRIATE:      INCLUDES TRANSFER/REASSIGN        FIDUCIARY APPOINTMENT       REFERENCE

             604511/2005 ANTONIELLO, PATRICIA vs. SANTELMO, ANTHONY                                 Page 5 of 5
             Motion No. 003

                                                          5 of 5
[* 5]