Motion for Summary Judgment

XXX

XXX

XXX

XXX

XXX

 

 

 

SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY

LAW DIVISION

SUSSEX COUNTY

 

XXX his wife,

 

Plaintiffs,

 

vs.

 

XXX, XXXX, LLC,

 

Defendants

 

 )

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

 XXX

 

Civil Action

 

Motion for Summary Judgment with Prejudice for all Defendants in Caption for Gregory Rosenfeld only

XXX                                )

XXX                       )

 

Vs.                                                     )

 

XXX                    )

 

Third-Part Defendants

 

 

 

TO: XXX

XXX

XXX

XXX

XXX, Third-Party Defendant, hereby states as follows in support of his motion for summary judgment:

 

  1. Jurisdiction

Third-Party Plaintiff avers that this honorable court reserves the right and jurisdiction to dismiss the Defendants’ complaints and arguments with prejudice. In the case of Freedman and XXX  the court stated as follows:

“It is well-settled that if a plaintiff chooses to stand on his complaint, an appellate court

may exercise jurisdiction over a dismissal without prejudice under § 1291, thereby converting the dismissal into one with prejudice.”

 

  1. Requirements of Grant of Summary Judgment

A summary judgment motion should be viewed as a valuable tool for this Court in administering justice. Summary judgment should not be denied if papers pertinent to the motion show palpably the absence of any issue of material fact, although allegations of

Pleadings, standing alone, may purport to raise such an issue. XXX

  1. XXX

Summary judgment is a proper remedy where there is no genuine issue of material fact challenged and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. This falls within the literal guidelines of Rule 4:46-2, which states that summary judgment must be granted: [I]f the pleadings, deposition, answers to interrogatories and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact challenged and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment or order as a matter of law. The rationale upon which this rule is premised was enunciated in XXX, wherein the Supreme Court declared:

“It is designed to provide a prompt, businesslike and inexpensive method of disposing of any cause which a discriminating search of the merits in the pleadings, depositions and admissions on file, together with the affidavits submitted on the motion, clearly show not to present any genuine issue of material fact requiring disposition at trial. . . . In conjunction with the pre-trial discovery and pre-trial conference procedure, the summary judgment procedure aims at “the swift uncovering of the merits and either their effective disposition or their advancement toward prompt resolution by trial.” See also XXXX

In the current case, the Defendants have not presented any issue of material fact in their pleadings that require disposition at trial hence the grant of a motion for summary judgment is merited.

 

In the case of XXX  court stated thus:

“At all events, even though we are satisfied that such is the plain and unambiguous meaning of the orders, the summary judgments were improvidently granted for another reason: clearly the non-settling defendants wholly failed to discharge their burden to show palpably the absence of a genuine issue of fact supporting their view of the intent of the plaintiffs and the settling defendants in making the compromise.”

In light of the preceding decision, the Defendants herein have failed to discharge their burden to show the absence of any genuine issue of fact hence it would only be fair and just if the Third-Party Plaintiff was granted a summary judgment on the current matter.

Therefore, the Third-Party Plaintiff is well within the time period for filling the motion and has the relevant documents attached hence cannot be denied for prejudice for failure to file any required statement of material facts.

 

  1. Gregory Rosenfield’s Statement of Facts in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment
  2. XXX and XXX (referred to as the “ROSENFELDS”), entered into a contract with XXX (hereinafter referred to as “XXX”) and XXX LLC (hereinafter referred to as “PRIDE”) in April 2021, for the purpose of performing specific home improvement services at their residence.
  3. XXX , Third-Party Plaintiff (hereinafter “GR”), is the son of XXX and XXX and resides in a mother-daughter style home at 18 Alpine Trail, Sparta, New Jersey (hereinafter “the HOME”), which was the subject of the contract with XXX.
  4. Subsequently, issues were identified concerning the quality of work performed by XXX and XXX, as well as the absence of required permits for the work conducted.
  5. On approximately XXX , the XXX  initiated legal proceedings by filing an initial Complaint against XXX, and unidentified parties.
  6. On around XXX and PRIDE responded by submitting an Answer to the Complaint, along with counter-claims and a Third-Party action.
  7. The Third-Party action brought forth by XXX and XXX  appears to have been intended to distress and burden the XXX  and GR, prompting GR to allocate resources for defending against the unfounded claims.
  8. During the summer of 2021, XXX  initiated communication with the neighbors of the XXX and GR, asserting that the “XXX don’t pay.”
  9. Following a message from GR to XXX  indicating that he was not allowed on the property, XXX excessively contacted GR through text messages and phone calls.
  10. On or about XXX , XXX  intruded into the backyard of the HOME, b) employed a drone to surveil the HOME, and c) positioned himself across the street to monitor the HOME, prompting GR to involve the Sparta Police Department.
  11. It is believed that XXX visited the police station in early December, asserting the presence of his belongings at the Home, contrary to earlier guidance.
  12. In response, XXX was escorted to the HOME by the police, where he identified certain items left behind, including a wheelbarrow, a hose, and a bag of dirt.
  13. GR allowed XXX  to retrieve the bag of dirt and hose, although they were not owned by XXX . The wheelbarrow was overlooked.
  14. While collecting these items, XXX gestured behind a Police Officer’s back as if to threaten GR.
  15. The aforementioned actions were undertaken with the intention of causing distress and anxiety to the XXX  and GR.
  16. As a result of XXX s actions, GR experienced significant distress, fear, and apprehension, along with concerns about possible future negative actions by XXX
  17. In response to XXX  actions, a formal trespass order was issued, officially prohibiting XXX from accessing the HOME and its adjacent property.

 

  1. Argument

The crux of Mr. Rosenfield’s claim lies in a clear breach of contract by the defendants, XXX  and XXX  LLC (hereinafter referred to as “the Defendants”). The factual circumstances leading to this claim are undisputed, and the evidence on record unequivocally establishes the existence of a binding agreement between Mr. Rosenfield and the Defendants.

The agreement, formed in XXX, was centered around the provision of specific home improvement services at XXX residence. This contract delineated the scope of work to be undertaken by the Defendants, including but not limited to repairs, renovations, and upgrades to the property. In return for their services, XXX agreed to compensate the Defendants with a specified sum, as stipulated in the contract.

However, what transpired following the contract’s execution painted a starkly different picture. The Defendants’ performance was marred by substandard work quality and a noticeable absence of the requisite permits for the executed tasks. As a result, the completed work not only fell short of XXX  expectations but also violated the terms of the agreement. Such a departure from the agreed-upon terms constitutes a breach of contract, leaving XXX  entitled to legal recourse.

The applicable legal standards further bolster the argument for granting summary judgment in this case. As established by relevant legal precedent, summary judgment is appropriate when there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Applying this standard to the facts at hand, it becomes evident that the evidence submitted by XXX establishes a compelling case for breach of contract. With the Defendants’ failure to present a countervailing narrative, there remains no genuine dispute as to the material facts of the case.

In seeking an award of $68,225.94, XXX  meticulously calculated the damages he suffered due to the Defendants’ breach of contract. This amount accurately represents the financial losses incurred as a direct result of the Defendants’ subpar performance and disregard for the contractual obligations. It is imperative to acknowledge that the damages sought are not arbitrary; rather, they are grounded in the factual evidence and corresponding legal principles.

Equity, fairness, and justice all converge in favor of granting summary judgment to XXX. The Defendants’ actions have resulted in substantial financial harm and emotional distress for XXX . A successful summary judgment would not only expedite the resolution of this matter but also provide XXX  with the appropriate remedy he deserves.

In conclusion, the evidence presented, the lack of substantive response from the Defendants’ side, and the alignment of this case with established legal standards converge to make a compelling case for granting summary judgment in favor of XXX .

 

  1. Motion of Summary Judgment on Prejudice Basis

In the case of  XXX  (App. Div. 2002), the court in delivering a motion for summary judgment on prejudice basis held thus:

“This Court grants the plaintiff’s motion on the grounds of judicial efficiency and economy, and also based on fairness. Simply no reason why, it appears to this Court, that the matter should proceed on Count 2 alone when the appeal on Count 1 and Count 3 looms into the future. I agree with the plaintiff’s position in that granting the motion will permit the plaintiff to file a single notice of appeal for her case, rather than multiple notices for different claims at different times.”

That in light of the preceding decision, the Third-Party Plaintiff requests this court to grant the motion on grounds of prejudice, judicial efficiency and economy. Additionally, in the case of XXX the court stated that:

“Dismissal with prejudice constitutes an adjudication of the merits as fully and completely as if the order had been entered after trial.” (Citing Lawlor v. Nat’l Screen Serv.

XXX

Accordingly, this Court ought to issue an order of summary judgment owing to the prejudicial acts of the Defendants and the Opposing Counsel. Precisely being non-responsive to the Third-Party Plaintiff’s interrogatories and motions. Further, in the case of XXX  the court stated as follows:

“XXX

The Third-Party Plaintiff that following the Opposing Counsel’s professional misconduct, dismissal and/or motion for summary judgment with prejudice is the ultimate sanction and ought to be ordered following the lack of a lesser sanction to erase the prejudice suffered by the Third-Party Plaintiff.

 

The Third-Party Plaintiff seeks an order scheduling a proof hearing to determine damages prior to the entering of a summary judgment against the Defendants, that is, XXX.

The Third-Party Plaintiff requests this Honorable Court to thereafter enter a summary judgment with prejudice in favor of the Third-Party Plaintiff, Gregory Rosenfeld for the sum of $68,225.94.

Moreover, in the case of XXX , the court stated thus:

“Under this rule summary judgment may be entered as to a part of a pleading which is sham, and an order in the nature of a pre-trial order must be entered as to a further part thereof which is uncontested; the cause may then proceed to trial as to the residue of the pleading.”

Accordingly, this court can enter a motion for summary judgment to the extent that the Defendants’ actions and those of the Opposing counsel are a sham.

CONCLUSION

The Third-Party Plaintiff’s interrogatories, discovery and complaint were not respondent to by the Defendants herein thus meriting entering a summary judgment against them by this Honorable Court.

To aggravate the malice against the Third-Party Plaintiff, the Opposing Counsel should be held in contempt of court for lying to this Honorable Court by claiming that he liaised with the Third-Party Plaintiff and agreed to an adjournment of the matter. That the preceding act is a gross and blatant unprofessional behavior and the court should take punitive and restorative measures against the Opposing counsel.

The Third-Party Plaintiff requests the Honorable Court to take notice that in support of this motion, the said party will rely on the Certification filed with the motion and all prior documents filed with regard to the subsisting matter.

A proposed form of Order is attached.

 

Dated this ____ XXXX

 

 

 

 

At Legal writing experts, we would be happy to assist in preparing any legal document you need. We are international lawyers and attorneys with significant experience in legal drafting, Commercial-Corporate practice and consulting. In the last few years, we have successfully undertaken similar assignments for clients from different jurisdictions. If given this opportunity, The LegalPen will be able to prepare the legal document within the shortest time possible. You can send us your quick enquiry ( here )