Civil Litigation Case Results

Debt Buyer Lawsuit Dismissed Under CPLR 3216

May 2023

Crown Asset Management, LLC vs. H.C. - Suffolk County District Court - Ronkonkoma

In this case Crown Asset Management LLC sued our client for a debt of just over $1,000 back in November of 2020. We filed an answer to the complaint and asserted various defenses to the action.


Nearly 3 years later, after the Plaintiff failed to prosecute or otherwise move forward with its case, the Court dismissed the case under CPLR 3216 for want of prosecution.


The dismissal is without prejudice, but it is likely that our client will not be contacted about this debt again.

Attorney: David A. Arpino

Freeze on Bank Account Removed, $18k judgment settled for $1,000

April 2021
Court

District Court, Nassau County Hempstead Part

Facts

Client had a civil money judgment entered against them in 2011. In 2020, his bank account was frozen based upon this judgment. With interest, the judgment balance had ballooned to nearly $20,000.

Results

We bring an emergency order to show cause to release the restraint placed on the bank account, negotiate a payment plan with the creditor reducing the $18,000 judgment down to the sum of $1,000. 

Defeats No-Fault Insurer Motion for Summary Judgment

May 2020/Updated September 2021

This case was an interesting and infrequently litigated issue under New York's no-fault laws and regulations. Here, the patient alleged that the hospital executed an assignment of benefits (NF-AOB), which, under normal circumstances would prohibit the hospital from seeking payment directly from the patient. Instead, the medical provider would have to seek payment directly from the car insurance company (either through an arbitration or lawsuit).


The wrinkle with this case was that the NF-AOB was not signed by a representative of the hospital, rather is was only signed by the Defendant. The court agreed with our position and denied the Defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. 


The attorney responsible for this case and practice area is Arnold Arpino. David Arpino was tasked with researching and drafting the opposition to the summary judgment motion.


UPDATE: Prior to trial, the parties reached a settlement.

Attorney: Arnold A. Arpino

Counterclaim Asserted Against our Medical Provider Client Dismissed on Procedural Grounds

April 2020

In this case we filed lawsuit against a defendant on behalf of a hospital. The defendant responded by filing a counterclaim against the medical provider alleging various claims and seeking a minimum of $20,000 in damages for "unjust enrichment" and "deceptive business practices." Our office took an educated and calculated risk not to respond to the counterclaim. We did this because in our professional opinion, the counterclaim did not allege sufficient facts on its face to make out a claim (meaning that the defendant did not provide any facts to support his argument and lawsuit). 


After 1 year elapsed, the Defendant lost his ability to enter a default judgment (CPLR 3215[c]). As a result, we asked the court to dismiss his counterclaim as abandoned. The court granted the relief and the counterclaim against the hospital was dismissed.

Attorney: Arnold A. Arpino

We Successfully Collect Ancient Judgment on Behalf of Creditor

March 2020

ARCHITECTURAL MARBLE TILE & STONE INC., v M.G., - Supreme Court County of Suffolk

This is a case where we got a default judgment against a corporation and an individual (as a personal guarantor) over a business to business loan transaction that took place in 2010. For years, our judgment enforcement attempts were stymied by the fact that the individual guarantor closed down his corporation and took a job working for a relative. The defendant's new corporate employer (owned and operated by an immediate family member) wasn't as forthcoming as they should have been to information subpoena's seeking asset information about the judgment debtor. It appeared that this judgment had hit a dead end and would not be collected.


Years later, a skip tracer in my office decided to run an asset search on this file. This time, the judgment debtor's employer had recent promotional videos posted online that showed our judgment debtor was an employee. We immediately issued an income execution to the Suffolk County Sheriff's Office. Upon the employer's receipt of the income execution, the employer decided to make an offer of settlement on the judgment on behalf of the judgment debtor. After almost a decade, our client decided to accept the offer in exchange for a satisfaction of judgment. 

Attorney: Arnold A. Arpino

Successful Judgment Recovery Effort From Difficult Judgment Debtor

January 2020

We represented a residential home improvement contractor in obtaining a money judgment against one of its customers in the trial court. For months, the judgment debtor promised payments, stated that his assets "were not liquid," and generally came up with every excuse as to why he could not make good on the judgment. 


After six months of nonpayment and broken promises, we began serious and intensive judgment enforcement proceedings. We re-interviewed our client and it appeared that the judgment debtor may have disclosed what banking institution he banked with in an email to them. We tried running a search of old emails using eDiscovery software, but that did not prove fruitful. What we did find was an email from the judgment debtor in which he CC'd his financial adviser.


We immediately sent a subpoena to the financial adviser demanding that he provide information on the whereabouts of the judgment debtors assets. Surreptitiously, the judgment debtor called us the day after his financial adviser received a subpoena making more promises to pay. 


At the same time, the contractor remembered a phone conversation from two years prior where the judgment debtor stated he needed to transfer money out of a popular national banking association. We immediately sent out what is called an Article 52 restraining notice to garnishee with a subpoena to place a freeze on the bank account.


The freeze on the bank account was later confirmed by the bank, and the judgment debtor immediately called us to pay off the full amount of the judgment plus all accrued interest, court costs and fees, in exchange for a release of the hold that was placed on his account. Our client's money judgment was satisfied in full.

Attorney: Arnold A. Arpino

Debt Buyer's Lawsuit Dismissed After Aggressive Pursuit of Private Arbitration

October 2019

Midland Funding LLC v. K.L. - County Court, Suffolk County

In this case, a debt buyer brought a motion for summary judgment against a our client, a consumer debtor. We investigated the allegations made by the creditor and realized that the card member agreement contained a private arbitration provision.


We successfully argued that the arbitration provision was so broad, that it included even the debt collection lawsuit, and that the agreement required the lawsuit's dismissal and the matter proceed to private arbitration.


 After seeing that the filing fee for private arbitration was $1,500; the creditor decided to release the $3,400 debt. 


Representation in this case was made possible by the firm's use of an alternative fee agreement.

Attorney: David A. Arpino

Conversion and Intentional Tort Lawsuit Thrown Out by Suffolk County Justice

August 2019

J.G. v. W.B & A.B - Supreme Court Suffolk County

Here we represented defendants who were being sued jointly for conversion and the intentional tort of damaging property. The defendants did not have access to any insurance coverage to represent them, and chose our office to represent them after speaking with multiple attorneys.


The Plaintiff's attorney failed to appear at a compliance conference and the case was adjourned. The Plaintiff's attorney again failed to appear at the next compliance conference, and our office made a motion to dismiss the case under 22 NYCRR 202.27. The Supreme Court Justice denied the motion, without prejudice, giving the Plaintiff one more shot.


The Plaintiff again failed to appear at a conference and this time the Justice granted our motion to dismiss the case for failure to appear at a compliance conference.

From the Client Perspective

"David is a bright and talented attorney who is patient and treats his clients with a personal touch. There was never a time when he was not to busy to pick up the phone or chat with me. There were plenty of times where he explained the same thing to me, but never Made me feel as though I was a bother. He was always on point and had a plan on what to do next. In the end, he handled my case with professional diligence and was able to obtain a dismissal for my matter."

 - William B.

Attorney: David A. Arpino

$50,000 Breach of Contract Claim Dismissed for Want of Prosecution - CPLR 3216

February 2019

In this case, we represented a commercial corporation in the defense of a $50,000 breach of contract claim. We won dismissal of this case on procedural grounds. Believe it or not, many cases are won and lost on issues of civil procedure (the rules governing litigation in the courts). A party can win or lose a case in court without ever having the court reach the merits of the lawsuit. In this case, we successfully used the New York Civil Practice Laws & Rules (CPLR) to our advantage. We used CPLR 3216 the "want of prosecution" rule to show that the Plaintiff failed to move the case along after receiving a 90-day demand from our office. Upon such a showing, the court dismissed the case against our client for failure to prosecute.

Attorney: Arnold A. Arpino

Share by: