On March 09, 2010 a
Letter,Correspondence
was filed
involving a dispute between
Kuplesky, Harold, Individually And On Behalf Of Starrett City Preservation Llc, Derivatively,
Rudman, Harvey, Individually And On Behalf Of Starrett City Preservation Llc, Derivatively,
and
Carol Gram Deane,
Dd Shopping Center Llc,
Dd Spring Creek Llc,
Disque D. Deane,
Salt Kettle Llc,
Sk Shopping Center Llc,
Sk Spring Creek Llc,
Spring Creek Plaza Llc,
Starrett City Preservation Llc,
St. Gervais Llc,
for Commercial Division
in the District Court of New York County.
Preview
WARNER PARTNERS, P.C.
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
950 THIRD AVENUE
NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10022
TELEPHONE
(212) 593-8000
TELECOPIER
(212) 593-9058
November 21, 2013
Hon. Shirley Werner Kornreich
Justice
Supreme Court, New York County
60 Centre Street
New York, New York 10007
Re: Rudman et ano. v. Deane et al.; Index No. 650159/10
Dear Justice Kornreich:
I write as attorney for defendant Estate of Disque D. Deane to request permission to
submit a short sur-reply in further opposition to the motion of plaintiff Harvey Rudman for
summary judgment dismissing the Deane Estate's counterclaims. 1 Our sur-reply would bring to
the Court's attention powerful newly discovered evidence- first obtained after the filing of
Rudman's reply affidavit on October 1, 2013- which directly contradicts Rudman's claim that
he was uninvolved in Andrea Bunis Management, Inc. ("ABMI"), a real estate management
firm. See Rudman Reply Aff. at 4, ~13 ("I have never played any role in the business of Andrea
Bunis Management, Inc."). ABMI is identified by the Deane Estate as the recipient of an unfair
competitive advantage as a result of Rudman's admitted purloining and continued withholding of
over 70,000 pages of documents belonging to the Deane Group. This new evidence raises
additional factual disputes requiring determination at trial and denial of Rudman's request for
summary judgment.
As the Court is already aware, the Deane Group was an unincorporated entity comprised
of the interests and activities of Mr. Deane, a renowned investment banker and investor. The
Deane Group included, inter alia, Mr. Deane's Managing General Partnership office and
activities for the massive Starrett City affordable housing complex in Brooklyn, his personal and
family investments and interests in various entities, and Deane family tax matters. By his own
admission, Rudman worked closely with and for Mr. Deane for more than two decades, resulting
in a fiduciary relationship by which Mr. Deane reposed his trust and confidence in Rudman.
When Rudman was discharged in April2009, he kept and has refused to return tens of thousands
of pages of Deane documents previously taken by him from the Deane Group offices; those
documents cover a vast range of sensitive Deane personal and business matters. The Deane
Estate's counterclaims demand, inter alia, the return of these documents, and assert causes of
1 My firm also represents all of the other defendants except Carol Deane individually and Spring Creek
Plaza, but the counterclaims were only asserted on behalf of Mr. Deane (who died during the litigation).
WARNER PARTNERS, P.C. Hon. Shirley Werner Kornreich
November 21,2013
Page2
action for breach of fiduciary duty and unfair competition.
Rudman claims that he is entitled to summary judgment dismissing the Estate's
counterclaims, in part because he says there is no evidence that he had any involvement with
ABMI, a potential competitor of Deane entities. In the Estate's opposition papers we noted inter
alia that even as recently as the day of the filing of our opposition (and continuing to this day)
the ABMI website identifies Rudman as the company's Chief Financial Officer. In his reply
affidavit, Rudman adamantly denied ever having any involvement in or employment with ABMI
and claimed that Bunis was and had been nothing more than a mere "family friend. " 2
While the summary judgment motions were being litigated we discovered evidence of
litigation nearly 20 years earlier in which an action was brought against Rudman, Bunis and
ABMI by the same attorneys who now represent Rudman in this action (Ms. Veit and Mr.
Eiseman ofthe Golenbock firm)- i.e., Application of 141 East 4ih Street Associates, 145-147
East 62nd Street Associates, 716 Madison Avenue Associates, and 554 Fifth Avenue Associates v.
ABR Management, Inc., Andrea Bunis Management, Inc.,Andrea Bunis, and Harvey Rudman,
Index No. 111895/1995 (Sup. Ct., N.Y. Co.). We immediately attempted to obtain from the
Clerk's Office the court files in the earlier litigation, only to find that they were archived and
would take a minimum of three months to retrieve. We did not obtain those files until late
October, more than three weeks after Rudman filed his reply.
Upon review of those files, it is clear that they give the lie to Rudman's current assertion
that he had nothing to do with Bunis's real estate business. The earlier litigation papers reveal
Bunis's sworn claim that Rudman was the "principal" and "an officer and shareholder ofBunis
Management"; that Rudman was "the manager" at ABMI; and that Bunis's authority over ABMI
accounts was under Rudman's direction. Indeed, the file contains a decision by Justice
Schackman, finding that in October 1994 "Bunis and Rudman, her alleged fiancee at the time,
created [ABMI] as a new corporate entity, with Rudman as the principal officer and sole
shareholder." 3
Accordingly we ask permission to submit a sur-reply to bring before the Court this newly
discovered documentation, which highlights material issues of disputed fact relevant to the
Estate's counterclaims against Rudman- i.e., whether Rudman made off with voluminous Deane
documents for the purpose of competing with the Deane Group in the real estate market through
his involvement with ABMI. If the Court grants this request, we can file the sur-reply within
two days of receiving notice of Your Honor's decision.
2 Both Rudman and Bunis testified to the same effect at their depositions, at which Bunis, as well as Rudman, was
represented by the Golenbock firm.
3 Regarding the nature of the social relationship between Rudman and Bunis, a point relevant to Rudman's ABMI
involvement, the papers from the earlier litigation contain Bunis's sworn testimony that they had been engaged to be
married, clearly more than mere "family friends" as he currently claims.
WARNER PARTNERS, P.C. Hon. ·shirley Werner Kornreich
November 21, 2013
Page 3
Thank you for your continued attention to this matter.
Respectfully,
L----'--7. w~
Kenneth E. Wamer
KEW:ak
cc: All Counsel of Record (viae-filing)
Preview
WARNER PARTNERS, P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 950 THIRD AVENUE NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10022 TELEPHONE (212) 593-8000 TELECOPIER (212) 593-9058 November 21, 2013 Hon. Shirley Werner Kornreich Justice Supreme Court, New York County 60 Centre Street New York, New York 10007 Re: Rudman et ano. v. Deane et al.; Index No. 650159/10 Dear Justice Kornreich: I write as attorney for defendant Estate of Disque D. Deane to request permission to submit a short sur-reply in further opposition to the motion of plaintiff Harvey Rudman for summary judgment dismissing the Deane Estate's counterclaims. 1 Our sur-reply would bring to the Court's attention powerful newly discovered evidence- first obtained after the filing of Rudman's reply affidavit on October 1, 2013- which directly contradicts Rudman's claim that he was uninvolved in Andrea Bunis Management, Inc. ("ABMI"), a real estate management firm. See Rudman Reply Aff. at 4, ~13 ("I have never played any role in the business of Andrea Bunis Management, Inc."). ABMI is identified by the Deane Estate as the recipient of an unfair competitive advantage as a result of Rudman's admitted purloining and continued withholding of over 70,000 pages of documents belonging to the Deane Group. This new evidence raises additional factual disputes requiring determination at trial and denial of Rudman's request for summary judgment. As the Court is already aware, the Deane Group was an unincorporated entity comprised of the interests and activities of Mr. Deane, a renowned investment banker and investor. The Deane Group included, inter alia, Mr. Deane's Managing General Partnership office and activities for the massive Starrett City affordable housing complex in Brooklyn, his personal and family investments and interests in various entities, and Deane family tax matters. By his own admission, Rudman worked closely with and for Mr. Deane for more than two decades, resulting in a fiduciary relationship by which Mr. Deane reposed his trust and confidence in Rudman. When Rudman was discharged in April2009, he kept and has refused to return tens of thousands of pages of Deane documents previously taken by him from the Deane Group offices; those documents cover a vast range of sensitive Deane personal and business matters. The Deane Estate's counterclaims demand, inter alia, the return of these documents, and assert causes of 1 My firm also represents all of the other defendants except Carol Deane individually and Spring Creek Plaza, but the counterclaims were only asserted on behalf of Mr. Deane (who died during the litigation). WARNER PARTNERS, P.C. Hon. Shirley Werner Kornreich November 21,2013 Page2 action for breach of fiduciary duty and unfair competition. Rudman claims that he is entitled to summary judgment dismissing the Estate's counterclaims, in part because he says there is no evidence that he had any involvement with ABMI, a potential competitor of Deane entities. In the Estate's opposition papers we noted inter alia that even as recently as the day of the filing of our opposition (and continuing to this day) the ABMI website identifies Rudman as the company's Chief Financial Officer. In his reply affidavit, Rudman adamantly denied ever having any involvement in or employment with ABMI and claimed that Bunis was and had been nothing more than a mere "family friend. " 2 While the summary judgment motions were being litigated we discovered evidence of litigation nearly 20 years earlier in which an action was brought against Rudman, Bunis and ABMI by the same attorneys who now represent Rudman in this action (Ms. Veit and Mr. Eiseman ofthe Golenbock firm)- i.e., Application of 141 East 4ih Street Associates, 145-147 East 62nd Street Associates, 716 Madison Avenue Associates, and 554 Fifth Avenue Associates v. ABR Management, Inc., Andrea Bunis Management, Inc.,Andrea Bunis, and Harvey Rudman, Index No. 111895/1995 (Sup. Ct., N.Y. Co.). We immediately attempted to obtain from the Clerk's Office the court files in the earlier litigation, only to find that they were archived and would take a minimum of three months to retrieve. We did not obtain those files until late October, more than three weeks after Rudman filed his reply. Upon review of those files, it is clear that they give the lie to Rudman's current assertion that he had nothing to do with Bunis's real estate business. The earlier litigation papers reveal Bunis's sworn claim that Rudman was the "principal" and "an officer and shareholder ofBunis Management"; that Rudman was "the manager" at ABMI; and that Bunis's authority over ABMI accounts was under Rudman's direction. Indeed, the file contains a decision by Justice Schackman, finding that in October 1994 "Bunis and Rudman, her alleged fiancee at the time, created [ABMI] as a new corporate entity, with Rudman as the principal officer and sole shareholder." 3 Accordingly we ask permission to submit a sur-reply to bring before the Court this newly discovered documentation, which highlights material issues of disputed fact relevant to the Estate's counterclaims against Rudman- i.e., whether Rudman made off with voluminous Deane documents for the purpose of competing with the Deane Group in the real estate market through his involvement with ABMI. If the Court grants this request, we can file the sur-reply within two days of receiving notice of Your Honor's decision. 2 Both Rudman and Bunis testified to the same effect at their depositions, at which Bunis, as well as Rudman, was represented by the Golenbock firm. 3 Regarding the nature of the social relationship between Rudman and Bunis, a point relevant to Rudman's ABMI involvement, the papers from the earlier litigation contain Bunis's sworn testimony that they had been engaged to be married, clearly more than mere "family friends" as he currently claims. WARNER PARTNERS, P.C. Hon. ·shirley Werner Kornreich November 21, 2013 Page 3 Thank you for your continued attention to this matter. Respectfully, L----'--7. w~ Kenneth E. Wamer KEW:ak cc: All Counsel of Record (viae-filing)