DOCSLIB.ORG

650 Fifth Avenue and Related Properties Doc

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
650 Fifth Avenue and Related Properties Doc In re: 650 Fifth Avenue and Related Properties Doc. 1895 USDC SDNY DOCUMENT ELECTRONICALLY FILED UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DOC #: _________________ SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK DATE FILED: June 29, 2017 ----------------------------------------------------------------- X : KIRSCHENBAUM, et al., : 09-cv-165 (KBF) : 09-cv-166 (KBF) : 09-cv-553 (KBF) Plaintiffs, : 09-cv-564 (KBF) : 10-cv-1627 (KBF) : 11-cv-3761 (KBF) : 12-mc-19 (KBF) -v- : 12-mc-20 (KBF) : 12-mc-21 (KBF) : 12-mc-22 (KBF) 650 FIFTH AVENUE and RELATED : 13-mc-71 (KBF) PROPERTIES, : 13-cv-1825 (KBF) : 13-cv-1848 (KBF) : Defendants. : OPINION & ORDER : ----------------------------------------------------------------- X KATHERINE B. FORREST, District Judge: Before the Court are a number of separate actions (the “Judgment Creditor actions” or “turnover actions”) brought by judgment creditors (“Judgment Creditors”) of the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran (the “Government of Iran”). The Judgment Creditors seek to enforce their judgments against property owned by defendants the Alavi Foundation (“Alavi” or the “New York Foundation”)1 and the entity of which it is the managing partner, 650 Fifth Avenue Company (the “650 Fifth Ave. Co.” or the “Partnership”). Plaintiffs assert that both entities are 1 “Alavi” is the most recent name of a charitable foundation that has held various names over time, including the Pahlavi Foundation and the Mostazafan Foundation, (GX 75 ¶¶ 1, 3); from time to time, it also was referred to as the “New York branch” of an Iranian Foundation. To minimize confusion, the Court largely to this entity as the “New York Foundation.” Dockets.Justia.com the agencies, instrumentalities, or alter egos of Iran.2 Each Judgment Creditor action asserts claims under one or both of § 201(a) of the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act (“TRIA”), 28 U.S.C. § 1610 note, or § 1610(b)(3) of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (“FSIA”), 28 U.S.C. § 1610(b)(3). The actions were coordinated for pre-trial and trial purposes. After lengthy and highly contentious discovery, a trip to the Second Circuit and back, and most recently a bench trial, the matter is now ready for final disposition. For the reasons set forth below, the Court concludes that the Judgment Creditors are entitled to a determination in their favor on both claims.3 I. JURISDICTION There are two separate bases for this Court’s subject matter jurisdiction. All Judgment Creditors assert claims pursuant to TRIA. As the Second Circuit noted in Kirschenbaum v. 650 Fifth Avenue & Related Properties, § 201(a) of TRIA provides “an independent basis for subject matter jurisdiction over post-judgment execution and attachment proceedings against property held in the hands of an agency or instrumentality of the terrorist party, even if the agency or instrumentality is not itself named in the judgment.” 830 F.3d 107, 132 (2d Cir. 2016). TRIA § 201(a) “clearly differentiates between the party that is the subject of 2 While these actions seek attachment and execution upon specific property (the “Subject Properties”), the New York Foundation and the Partnership are herein referred to as “defendants” for convenience. 3 As the relief is the same for both claims, there is ultimately no outcome-determinative distinction between whether a Judgment Creditor asserts a claim under the TRIA, FSIA, or both. As part of its determination, the Court also grants the Hegna plaintiffs’ order to show cause. (Show Cause Order (“SCO”), ECF No. 431-32; Am. SCO, ECF No. 21.) The Hegnas’ particular claim is discussed in more detail herein. 2 the underlying judgment itself, which can be any terrorist party (here, Iran), and parties whose blocked assets are subject to execution or attachment, which can include not only the terrorist party but also ‘any agency or instrumentality of that terrorist party.’” Id. at 132 (quoting Weinstein v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 609 F.3d 43, 49 (2d Cir. 2010)). FSIA § 1610(b) provides a separate basis for jurisdiction for all Judgment Creditor actions (except those brought by the Greenbaum and Peterson plaintiffs, who did not assert such a claim). In September 2014, this Court granted summary judgment on, inter alia, plaintiffs’ FSIA claims under § 1610(a)(7) and § 1610(g). (ECF No. 1125.)4 In 2016, the Second Circuit vacated that decision. Kirschenbaum, 830 F.3d at 122-30. That vacatur left untouched plaintiffs’ FSIA claims pursuant to § 1610(b)(3)—a section under which they had asserted claims but had not moved for summary judgment, and to which the appeal did not relate. This Court’s May 4, 2017 decision addresses this procedural issue in some detail. (ECF No. 1649.) Indeed, while each Judgment Creditor asserting FSIA claims in a complaint had alleged one pursuant to § 1610(b)(3),5 plaintiffs’ 2013 memorandum in support of summary judgment explicitly stated that the motion was not brought with respect to that provision. (ECF No. 871 at 13 n.13; see also ECF No. 1125 at 44 n.20.) 4 Unless otherwise noted, all ECF citations are to Case No. 08-cv-10934. 5 The Court addresses defendants’ argument that the Heiser Judgment Creditors have not brought a claim pursuant to FSIA § 1610(b) in more detail below. 3 Accordingly, as discussed more fully in this Court’s May 4, 2017 decision, the § 1610(b) claims remain live and are resolved herein. II. PROPERTY AT ISSUE The property at issue includes:6 1. The real property at 650 Fifth Avenue in New York, New York in 650 Fifth Ave. Co.’s name, which was built in the late 1970s; 2. The New York Foundation’s interest in the 650 Fifth Ave. Co.; 3. The real property at 2313 South Voss Road in Houston, Texas in the New York Foundation’s name, which was acquired in 1988; 4. The real property at 55-11 Queens Boulevard in Queens, New York in the New York Foundation’s name, which was acquired in 1991 and 1997; 5. The real property at 4836 Marconi Avenue in Carmichael, California in the New York Foundation’s name, which was acquired in 1989; 6. The currently undeveloped real property at 4204 and 4300 Aldie Road in Catharpin, Virginia in the New York Foundation’s name, which was acquired in 1990; and 7. The real property at 7917 Montrose Road and 8100 Jeb Stuart Road in Rockville, Maryland in the New York Foundation’s name, which was acquired in 1981 and 1984. In addition, plaintiffs seek to attach and execute on three bank accounts at Sterling National Bank held in the New York Foundation’s name.7 Together, the property and bank accounts at issue in this action are referred to as the “Subject Properties.” 6 (See GX 79; PX 50; GX 77.) 7 (See Trial Tr. 2475:19-2477:1 (Van Driessche).) 4 III. PLAINTIFFS’ CLAIMS A chart setting forth the relevant Judgment Creditors’ claims is attached as Appendix A to this Opinion. Following submission of this chart to the Court by the Judgment Creditors, (ECF No. 1811-1), defendants lodged three objections to the information included: (1) that the Hegna Judgment Creditors, who filed a show- cause order rather than a complaint, have not initiated a civil action against defendants in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure;8 (2) that the Heiser Judgment Creditors have not brought an FSIA § 1610(b) claim; and (3) that because the two Greenbaum Judgment Creditor actions stem from the same underlying complaint, Case No. 09-cv-564 (which Assa Corporation (“Assa Corp.”) removed from state court on January 21, 2009) should be dismissed. (See ECF No. 1831.) The third objection has been resolved. The Greenbaum plaintiffs filed a consent motion to consolidate the two Greenbaum cases on June 21, 2017, thus mooting defendants’ objection. (See ECF No. 1873.) The Court granted the motion on June 22, 2017. (ECF No. 1876.) Regarding the second objection, the Heiser Judgment Creditors responded to defendants’ letter on June 16, 2017, arguing that their complaint refers to FSIA § 1610 generally in several paragraphs, that they have repeatedly asserted FSIA § 1610(b) claims since their action was filed four years ago, and that defendants have repeatedly acknowledged those claims. (ECF 8 Defendants, however, did not otherwise object to the content of the chart as it relates to the Hegna plaintiffs. And in summations, defendants did not address the Hegnas’ claims separate from those of the other Judgment Creditors. 5 No. 1851.) The Court agrees that the Heiser Judgment Creditors have asserted a § 1610(b) claim. The issue regarding the Hegna Judgment Creditors’ action is unique.9 The Hegna plaintiffs commenced a proceeding by way of an order to show cause on March 27, 2009. That show-cause proceeding—resolved as part of this Opinion & Order—seeks overlapping relief with the other Judgment Creditors and on the same bases. In 2009, there was some initial back and forth before the then-presiding judge, the Honorable Richard J. Holwell, as to whether the Hegnas should be required to file a formal complaint. By order dated April 16, 2009, Judge Holwell concluded a complaint was unnecessary. (ECF No. 15 (“After further review of the Hegna plaintiffs’ submissions, the Court sees no need for a complaint to be filed . .”).) Notably, the nature of the relief sought in Hegna plaintiffs’ initial and amended orders to show cause parallels that sought by the other Judgment Creditors. (See SCO; SCO Mem., ECF No. 431-18; SCO Aff., ECF No. 431-19; Am. SCO.)10 The record shows no further discussion or motion practice regarding this issue, and the Hegnas’ order to show cause has remained on the docket unresolved. 9 The Hegna Judgment Creditors responded to defendants’ letter on June 19 and 25, 2017.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Assessment Actions
    Assessment Actions Borough Code Block Number Lot Number Tax Year Remission Code 1 1883 57 2018 1 385 56 2018 2 2690 1001 2017 3 1156 62 2018 4 72614 11 2018 2 5560 1 2018 4 1342 9 2017 1 1390 56 2018 2 5643 188 2018 1 386 36 2018 1 787 65 2018 4 9578 3 2018 4 3829 44 2018 3 3495 40 2018 1 2122 100 2018 3 1383 64 2017 2 2938 14 2018 Page 1 of 604 09/27/2021 Assessment Actions Owner Name Property Address Granted Reduction Amount Tax Class Code THE TRUSTEES OF 540 WEST 112 STREET 105850 2 COLUM 226-8 EAST 2ND STREET 228 EAST 2 STREET 240500 2 PROSPECT TRIANGLE 890 PROSPECT AVENUE 76750 4 COM CRESPA, LLC 597 PROSPECT PLACE 23500 2 CELLCO PARTNERSHIP 6935500 4 d/ CIMINELLO PROPERTY 775 BRUSH AVENUE 329300 4 AS 4305 65 REALTY LLC 43-05 65 STREET 118900 2 PHOENIX MADISON 962 MADISON AVENUE 584850 4 AVENU CELILY C. SWETT 277 FORDHAM PLACE 3132 1 300 EAST 4TH STREET H 300 EAST 4 STREET 316200 2 242 WEST 38TH STREET 242 WEST 38 STREET 483950 4 124-469 LIBERTY LLC 124-04 LIBERTY AVENUE 70850 4 JOHN GAUDINO 79-27 MYRTLE AVENUE 35100 4 PITKIN BLUE LLC 1575 PITKIN AVENUE 49200 4 GVS PROPERTIES LLC 559 WEST 164 STREET 233748 2 EP78 LLC 1231 LINCOLN PLACE 24500 2 CROTONA PARK 1432 CROTONA PARK EAS 68500 2 Page 2 of 604 09/27/2021 Assessment Actions 1 1231 59 2018 3 7435 38 2018 3 1034 39 2018 3 7947 17 2018 4 370 1 2018 4 397 7 2017 1 389 22 2018 4 3239 1001 2018 3 140 1103 2018 3 1412 50 2017 1 1543 1001 2018 4 659 79 2018 1 822 1301 2018 1 2091 22 2018 3 7949 223 2018 1 471 25 2018 3 1429 17 2018 Page 3 of 604 09/27/2021 Assessment Actions DEVELOPM 268 WEST 84TH STREET 268 WEST 84 STREET 85350 2 BANK OF AMERICA 1415 AVENUE Z 291950 4 4710 REALTY CORP.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report for the As a Result of the National Financial Environment, Throughout 2009, US Congress Calendar Year 2009, Pursuant to Section 43 of the Banking Law
    O R K Y S T W A E T E N 2009 B T A ANNUAL N N E K M REPORT I N T G R D E P A WWW.BANKING.STATE.NY.US 1-877-BANK NYS One State Street Plaza New York, NY 10004 (212) 709-3500 80 South Swan Street Albany, NY 12210 (518) 473-6160 333 East Washington Street Syracuse, NY 13202 (315) 428-4049 September 15, 2010 To the Honorable David A. Paterson and Members of the Legislature: I hereby submit the New York State Banking Department Annual Report for the As a result of the national financial environment, throughout 2009, US Congress calendar year 2009, pursuant to Section 43 of the Banking Law. debated financial regulatory reform legislation. While the regulatory debate developed on the national stage, the Banking Department forged ahead with In 2009, the New York State Banking Department regulated more than 2,700 developing and implementing new state legislation and regulations to address financial entities providing services in New York State, including both depository the immediate crisis and avoid a similar crisis in the future. and non-depository institutions. The total assets of the depository institutions supervised exceeded $2.2 trillion. State Regulation: During 2009, what began as a subprime mortgage crisis led to a global downturn As one of the first states to identify the mortgage crisis, New York was fast in economic activity, leading to decreased employment, decreased borrowing to act on developing solutions. Building on efforts from 2008, in December and spending, and a general contraction in the financial industry as a whole.
    [Show full text]
  • UNITED STATES COURT of APPEALS for the SECOND CIRCUIT August Term 2015
    Case 14-1978, Document 193-1, 07/20/2016, 1820060, Page1 of 76 14‐1963(L) Kirschenbaum, et al. v. 650 Fifth Avenue and Related Properties UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT ______________ August Term 2015 (Argued: November 18, 2015 Decided: July 20, 2016) Docket Nos. 14‐1963(L), 14‐1967, 14‐1971, 14‐1974, 14‐1978, 14‐1982, 14‐1986, 14‐1988, 14‐1996, 14‐2098 ____________ KIRSCHENBAUM, ET AL. V. 650 FIFTH AVENUE AND RELATED PROPERTIES JASON KIRSCHENBAUM, ISABELLE KIRSCHENBAUM, on her own behalf and as Executrix of the Estate of Martin Kirschenbaum, JOSHUA KIRSCHENBAUM, DAVID KIRSCHENBAUM, DANIELLE TEITLEBAUM, Plaintiffs‐Appellees, ANNA BEER, HARRY BEER, on his own behalf and as Administrator of the Estate of Alan Beer, ESTELLE CARROLL, PHYLLIS MAISEL, Plaintiffs‐Appellees, STEVEN M. GREENBAUM, in his personal capacity and as administrator of the Estate of Judith (Shoshana) Lillian Greenbaum, ALAN HAYMAN, SHIRLEE HAYMAN, Plaintiffs‐Appellees, CARLOS ACOSTA, MARIA ACOSTA, TOVA ETTINGER, IRVING FRANKLIN, in his personal capacity and as personal representative of the estate of Irma Franklin, BARUCH KAHANE, LIBBY KAHANE, in her personal capacity and as Administratrix Case 14-1978, Document 193-1, 07/20/2016, 1820060, Page2 of 76 of the Estate of Meir Kahane, ETHEL J. GRIFFIN, as Public Administrator of the County of New York and Administratrix of the Estate of Binyamin Kahane, NORMAN KAHANE, in his personal capacity and as Executor of the Estate of Sonia Kahane, CIPORAH KAPLAN, Plaintiffs‐Appellees, EDWENA R. HEGNA, Executrix of the Estate of Charles Hegna, STEVEN A. HEGNA, LYNN MARIE HEGNA MOORE, CRAIG M.
    [Show full text]
  • TM 3.1 Inventory of Affected Businesses
    N E W Y O R K M E T R O P O L I T A N T R A N S P O R T A T I O N C O U N C I L D E M O G R A P H I C A N D S O C I O E C O N O M I C F O R E C A S T I N G POST SEPTEMBER 11TH IMPACTS T E C H N I C A L M E M O R A N D U M NO. 3.1 INVENTORY OF AFFECTED BUSINESSES: THEIR CHARACTERISTICS AND AFTERMATH This study is funded by a matching grant from the Federal Highway Administration, under NYSDOT PIN PT 1949911. PRIME CONSULTANT: URBANOMICS 115 5TH AVENUE 3RD FLOOR NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10003 The preparation of this report was financed in part through funds from the Federal Highway Administration and FTA. This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S. Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The contents of this report reflect the views of the author who is responsible for the facts and the accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do no necessarily reflect the official views or policies of the Federal Highway Administration, FTA, nor of the New York Metropolitan Transportation Council. This report does not constitute a standard, specification or regulation. T E C H N I C A L M E M O R A N D U M NO.
    [Show full text]
  • G.4.5 Changes in Status of Banks and Branches
    RELEASED SEPTEM'sER 30, 1985 BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM G.4.5 REPORT CHANGES IN STATUS OF BANKS AND BRANCHES DURING AUGUST 1985 NAME AND LOCATION OF BANKS AND BRANCHES THIS COMPILATION IS DERIVED LARGELY FROM SECONDARY SOURCES. IT IS NOT AN OFFICIAL REPORT OF CHANGES IN THE BANKING STRUCTURE. UNDERLINED INFORMATION ARF CORRECTIONS TC; PREVIOUS G.4.5 RELEASES, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 1/ THE BRANCHES LISTED WERE PREVIOUSLY BRANCHES OF THE SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATION PRIOR TO ITS CONVERSION TO A BANK Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis TABLE OF CONTENTS NEH BANKS EXCEPT SUCCESSIONS AND CONVERSIONS ......................................... 1 SUCCESSIONS AND CONVERSIONS .......................................................... 4 CONSOLIDATIONS AND ABSORPTIONS, ETC...................................................... 5 CORPORATE REORGANIZATIONS ............................................................ 9 ADMISSION OF NON-MEM BANK TO F.R. MEMBERSHIP........................................... 12 VOLUNTARY LIQUIDATION ................................................................ 13 NON-INSURED BANK ADMITTED TO INSURANCE ................................................ 13 NON-INSURED INDUSTRIAL BANK ADMITTED TO INSURANCE .................................... 13 CHANGE IN TITLE AND/OR LOCATION OF BANKS ............................................. 14 BRANCHES ESTABLISHED DE N O V O ........................................................... 16 BRANCHES ACQUIRED BY CONSOL.,
    [Show full text]
  • Manhattan Office Market
    Manhattan Offi ce Market 1 ST QUARTER 2016 REPORT A NEWS RECAP AND MARKET SNAPSHOT Pictured: 915 Broadway Looking Ahead Finance Department’s Tentative Assessment Roll Takes High Retail Rents into Account Consumers are not the only ones attracted by the luxury offerings along the city’s prime 5th Avenue retail corridor between 48th and 59th Streets where activity has raised retail rents. The city’s Department of Finance is getting in on the action, prompting the agency to increase tax assessments on some of the high-profi le properties. A tentative tax roll released last month for the 2016-2017 tax year brings the total market value of New York City’s real estate to over $1 trillion — reportedly for the fi rst time. The overall taxable assessed values for the city would increase 8.10%. Brooklyn’s assessed values accounted for the sharpest rise of 9.83% from FY 2015/2016, followed by Manhattan’s 8.47% increase. Although some properties along the 5th Avenue corridor had a reduction in valuations the properties were primarily offi ce, not retail according to a reported analysis of the tentative tax roll details. Building owners have the opportunity to appeal the increase; but an unexpected rise in market value — and hence real estate taxes, will negatively impact the building’s bottom line and value. Typically tenants incur the burden of most of the tax increases from the time the lease is signed, and the landlord pays the taxes that existed before the signing; but in some cases the tenant increase in capped, leaving the burden of the additional expense on the landlord.
    [Show full text]
  • Seele Project Map New York
    projects in new york Current and completed seele-projects, you may visit in and around New York. 01 Trinity Church (sacral building) 08 Nike High Profile Store (retail) 15 Burberry Flagship Store (retail) steel-glass-canopy for the approx. 1,000 sqm steel-and-glass 400 sqm post-and-beam entrance are of the church façade, approx. 117 sqm all-glass construction and 20 sqm https://www.trinitywallstreet.org/ structure for entrance façade storefront glazing Wall Street Station https://www.nike.com/us/en_us/retail/en/nike-nyc https://us.burberry.com/store-locator/united-states 75 Broadway open to the public 57 St, line F seele, Inc. / 2019 seele, Inc. / 2018 5 Av / 53 St, lines E, M seele, Inc. / 2002 9 E 57th Street 650 Fifth Avenue 02 Apple Retail Store SoHo (retail) 09 Valentino Flagship Store (retail) 16 432 Park Avenue (residential building) all-glass bridge, balustrades post-and-beam construction, lobby glazing, sliding doors, and staircase 36 m tall, steel-and-glass 14 vesitbule, entrance glass canopy https://www.apple.com/retail/soho/ façade extending 8 levels (panes measuring 6.2 × 3.2 m) Prince St, lines Q, R www.valentino.com 13 https://www.432parkavenue.com/ 103 Prince St open to the public (only canopy outside) seele, Inc. / 2012 seele, Inc. / 2014 5 Av / 53 St, lines E, M 12 seele, Inc. / 2016 Lexington Av / 59 St 693 Fifth Avenue lines N, R, W 11 432 Park Avenue 03 Apple Retail Store 14th Street (retail) 10 Apple Cube (retail) 17 277 Park Avenue (office building) glass doors and windows, All-glass cube, sprial 10 - under construction - all-glass spiral staircase staircase, elevator 15 steel-and-glass structure for extending two levels www.apple.com/retail/fifthavenue/ 09 16 canopies, glass façade for www.apple.com/retail/west14thstreet/ 5 Avenue, lines N, R, W 08 entrances including doors 14 St / 8 Av, lines A, C, E 767 Fifth Avenue 17 reception open to the public seele, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • Supreme Court of the United States
    No. 16-827 ================================================================ In The Supreme Court of the United States --------------------------------- --------------------------------- ALAVI FOUNDATION and 650 FIFTH AVENUE COMPANY, Petitioners, v. JASON KIRSCHENBAUM, et al., Respondents. --------------------------------- --------------------------------- On Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari To The United States Court Of Appeals For The Second Circuit --------------------------------- --------------------------------- BRIEF IN OPPOSITION --------------------------------- --------------------------------- JAMES L. BERNARD Counsel of Record CURTIS C. MECHLING PATRICK N. PETROCELLI PAMELA S. TAKEFMAN STROOCK & STROOCK & LAVAN LLP 180 Maiden Lane New York, NY 10038 (212) 806-5400 [email protected] Counsel for Respondents Jason Kirschenbaum, et al.; Anna Beer, et al.; Steven M. Greenbaum, et al.; and Carlos Acosta, et al. [Additional Counsel Listed On Inside Cover] ================================================================ COCKLE LEGAL BRIEFS (800) 225-6964 WWW.COCKLELEGALBRIEFS.COM LIVIU VOGEL SALON MARROW DYCKMAN NEWMAN & BROUDY LLP 292 Madison Avenue New York, NY 10017 (212) 661-7100 Counsel for Respondents Terry Abbott, et al. RICHARD M. KREMEN DALE K. CATHELL DLA PIPER LLP (US) 6225 Smith Avenue Baltimore, MD 21209 (410) 580-3000 Counsel for Respondents The Estate of Michael Heiser, et al. TIMOTHY B. FLEMING WIGGINS CHILDS PANTAZIS FISHER GOLDFARB PLLC 1850 M Street, NW, Suite 720 Washington, DC 20036 (202) 467-4489 Counsel for Respondents Fiona Havlish, et al. PETER R. KOLKER ZUCKERMAN SPAEDER LLP 1800 M Street, NW Washington, DC 20036 (202) 778-1800 Counsel for Respondents Jenny Rubin, et al. i QUESTION PRESENTED Section 1603(b) of the Foreign Sovereign Immuni- ties Act of 1976 (“FSIA”), Pub. L. No. 94-583, 90 Stat. 2891 (codified as amended at 28 U.S.C. §§ 1602 et seq.), 28 U.S.C. § 1603(b), defines the term “agency or instru- mentality of a foreign state.” Section 201 of the Terror- ism Risk Insurance Act of 2002 (“TRIA”), Pub.
    [Show full text]
  • Manhattan Retail Market MID-3RD QUARTER 2019 REPORT
    Manhattan Retail Market MID-3RD QUARTER 2019 REPORT Pictured: 19 Union Square West Looking Ahead City Council Approves Bill Requiring Registration of Storefronts On February 23rd the city council approved a bill that if signed into law by Mayor de Blasio will require the Department of Finance (DOF) to collect data and establish a public dataset of ground fl oor or 2nd fl oor commercial premises throughout New York City. Landlords and property owners will be required to register no later than one year after the effective date of the enactment of the amendment to local law; and in each year thereafter according the text posted on the city council’s website. The bill had initially been proposed in March among several others aimed at protecting small independently-owned businesses; but modifi cations have shifted the responsibility of the creation and maintenance of the publicly accessible online database from the Department of Small Business Services (SBS) to the DOF. The searchable dataset labeled by some as a Storefront Tracker is expected to be established by the DOF no later than (6) months after receiving owner submissions; and be based upon registrations fi led during the previous year. Requirements differing for Class 1 property owners, electronic registration submissions to the DOF as part of the annual income and expense statement submission will include: 1. The street address of the premises, including borough, community board district, block and lot number, and zip code; 2. The tax identifi cation number of the property owner; 3. A brief description of the type of the premises, including its current use; 4.
    [Show full text]
  • 650 FIFTH AVENUE ) Case No.: 1:08-CV-10934-KBF and RELATED PROPERTIES ) ) ) )
    Case 1:08-cv-10934-KBF Document 1298 Filed 03/11/15 Page 1 of 33 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ) ) IN RE 650 FIFTH AVENUE ) Case No.: 1:08-CV-10934-KBF AND RELATED PROPERTIES ) ) ) ) MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION TO INTERVENE Case 1:08-cv-10934-KBF Document 1298 Filed 03/11/15 Page 2 of 33 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 1 II. OVERVIEW OF THE LITIGATION AGAINST IRAN FOR ITS ROLE IN SPONSORING ACTS OF TERRORISM .......................................................................... 2 III. THE LIMITED FUND CLASS ACTION .......................................................................... 5 A. Equity Mandates the Creation of “Limited Fund” For Iran’s Victims ................... 6 B. The Claims of Iran’s Victims Far Exceed the Value of Iran’s Available Assets ...................................................................................................................... 8 C. The Claims of Iran’s Victims Far Exceed the Value of Iran’s Available Assets ...................................................................................................................... 9 IV. INTERVENORS’ MOTION TO INTERVENE SHOULD BE GRANTED ................... 11 A. Intervenors Should Be Permitted to Intervene as of Right in this Litigation ........ 11 1. Intervenors Have a Substantial Interest in the Distribution of the Funds Subject to this Litigation and that Interest Would Be Impaired
    [Show full text]
  • ЪЧM I C R O S O F T W O R
    Daniel S. Ruzumna (DR-2105) Leonard M. Braman (LB-4381) Krista D. Caner (KC-7358) Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP 1133 Avenue of the Americas New York, New York 10036 Telephone 212-336-2000 Facsimile 212-336-2222 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - X UNITED STATES OF AMERICA : v. : ALL RIGHT, TITLE, AND INTEREST OF ASSA : CORPORATION, ASSA COMPANY LIMITED, AND BANK MELLI IRAN IN 650 FIFTH : AVENUE COMPANY, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE REAL PROPERTY AND : Civil Action No. 08 Civ. 10934 (RJH) APPURTENANCES LOCATED AT 650 FIFTH AVENUE, NEW YORK, NEW YORK, WITH : ALL IMPROVEMENTS AND ATTACHMENTS THEREON, ET AL., : Defendants in rem. : - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - X ALAVI FOUNDATION’S AND 650 FIFTH AVENUE COMPANY’S MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF THEIR MOTION TO DISMISS THE AMENDED COMPLAINT PATTERSON BELKNAP WEBB & TYLER LLP 1133 Avenue of the Americas New York, New York 10036 Attorneys for Claimants Alavi Foundation and 650 Fifth Avenue Company PRELIMINARY STATEMENT ................................................................................................. 1 ALLEGATIONS OF THE COMPLAINT ................................................................................. 4 A. The Foundation and the Building .................................................................................... 4 B. The Fifth Avenue Company............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 20Q2 Supplemental
    SL Green Realty Corp. is a self-managed real estate investment trust, or Forward-looking Statements REIT, with in-house capabilities in property management, acquisitions and This supplemental reporting package includes certain statements that may dispositions, financing, development, redevelopment, construction and be deemed to be "forward-looking statements" within the meaning of the leasing. Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 and are intended to be As of June 30, 2020, the Company held interests in 96 buildings totaling covered by the safe harbor provisions thereof. All statements, other than 41.0 million square feet. This included ownership interests in 28.7 million statements of historical facts, included in this press release that address square feet in Manhattan buildings and 11.2 million square feet securing activities, events or developments that we expect, believe or anticipate will debt and preferred equity investments. or may occur in the future, are forward-looking statements, including the • SL Green’s common stock is listed on the New York Stock Exchange statements herein under the section entitled "Guidance". These forward- and trades under the symbol SLG. looking statements are based on certain assumptions and analyses made by us in light of our experience and our perception of historical trends, current • SL Green maintains a website at https://slgreen.com where key conditions, expected future developments and other factors we believe are investor relations data can be found. This supplemental financial appropriate. Forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future package is available through the Company’s website. performance and actual results or developments may differ materially, and • This data is furnished to supplement audited and unaudited we caution you not to place undue reliance on such statements.
    [Show full text]