Managing Agent-Board-Defense-Coop-Attorney Complex

damn, seems like the seller got her vengeance tho, good for her.

Still waiting for the judge's decision; I've got it on eTrack so I should be notified when it comes down. I've got a few more cases that have already been decided that I will post as the spirit moves me. Fascinating reading, each of them.

I have an existing case of PTSD from reading Coop litigation docs so I try and avoid going thru all the motion practice but where did "the seller got her vengeance" here?

Oh I read it wrong, I thought decision was delivered.

@30yrs - In the interest of not triggering any PTSD, I am not going to post the litigation you were involved in, though that one has all the elements of great coop drama. Had I been the finder of fact, I would have been inclined to find that the litigation that named you was ginned up by the coop attorneys who wanted to get back at you for replacing them as coop attorneys after an earlier litigation that it looks like they botched at the coop's expense (a litigation where it looks like the coop was ordered to pay the other side's legal fees in addition to its own). I don't expect you to comment, but just want you to know I can understand why you have PTSD. Again, that was some crazy.

multicityresident, since you read some case docs, could you please share with us some lawyers who successfully punished the management agents and boards?

Link not working.

Try this link: https://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/webcivil/FCASSearch?param=I
and put in whatever Index Number I provide for whichever case interests you. The Index Number for the case above is 0154712/2015. Another case of interest that should give shareholders some comfort is Index Number 105460/2011. NWT was so much better at this.

Maddening. When you input Index Number 105460/2011, it does not give you the judge's decision, which led to whatever settlement ensued on 5/29/17. How can it be that the decision is only available to lawyers who have access to paid legal research and not the general public. This is the second case I have found where the publicly available record is mysteriously deficient.

For any lawyers out who can find a way to post the decision to which I am referring in Index Number 105460/2011, the case is Cohen v CASSM Realty Corp, 39 N.Y.S.3d 597, 2016 N.Y. Slip Op. 26327.

And for Anton, the attorney who represented the shareholder in Cohen v. CASSM Realty is one Carol A Sigmond: https://marquistoplawyers.com/2018/06/12/carol-sigmond/

You have no idea how many hours I spent in the basement of 60 Centre Street. I even had one of those debit cards whose only use was for the photocopy machines there.

Outcome for the case in OP of this thread: Plaintiff won at trial and was awarded attorney fees. Shareholder prevailed on a bad faith cause of action against her coop board for its refusal to approve any of her buyers. (Alleged that the board wanted the apartment for the building itself to use as a gym).

Petition for attorneys fees close to $500K, but I don't think a final order has been issued approving that amount.

If anyone wants to look up all the fun details, go to ecourts (https://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/webcivil/FCASMain) and do a search using the information below.

Court: New York Supreme Court
Index Number: 0154712/2015
Case Name: GRAHAM, SHARIE vs. 420 EAST 72ND TENANTS CORP.

And for Anton, the attorney who got justice for the shareholder in the above-referenced case was one Scott Himes:

KISNER MILLER HIMES PC
40 FULTON ST., 12TH FL
NEW YORK, NY 10170
212 585-3425

Thanks for the fun read, MCR. (At least the amount I was willing to read.)

That's a fascinating read
WOW

If I can do math, the total award to the plaintiff is $777k. You go, girl!

All the Real Estate attorney big guns have now entered Graham v 420 East 72nd (case that started this thread). This appears to be the case RE bar has been waiting for to revisit business judgment rule.

Never mind - the cryptic eCourts update I got yesterday notifying Rosenberg & Estis entrance is clearly outdated. When I pulled up the actual docket, it shows that at some point after all the big guns entered and a notice of appeal was filed, the parties settled and the judgment has been satisfied, whatever that final judgment was. I would love to see 420 E72nd financial statements to see how much coop ultimately paid, as well as how it paid (assessed shareholders vs borrow against the building).