Sheindlin v. Brady
| Decision Date | 07 April 2022 |
| Docket Number | 21-cv-1124 (LJL) |
| Citation | 597 F.Supp.3d 607 |
| Parties | Gregory SHEINDLIN, Plaintiff, v. James BRADY, Defendant. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York |
Michael Howard Sussman, Sussman & Watkins, Goshen, NY, for Plaintiff.
Plaintiff Gregory Sheindlin ("Sheindlin" or "Plaintiff") brings three causes of action for defamation against James Brady ("Brady" or "Defendant"). Dkt. No. 1. The parties filed competing motions for summary judgment on Sheindlin's claims. See Dkt. Nos. 123, 128. On March 31, 2022, the Court issued an Order in which Brady's motion for summary judgment was granted in part and denied in part, Sheindlin's motion for summary judgment was denied, and a telephonic case management conference was scheduled. Dkt. No. 155. The Court stated that its reasons would be set forth in an Opinion to follow. Id. This Opinion sets forth the reasons for the Court's decision.
The following facts are undisputed for purposes of summary judgment except as otherwise indicated.
This lawsuit relates to a state court lawsuit brought by IGS Realty Co., L.P. ("IGS Realty") against Brady as the guarantor of unpaid rent for commercial spaces leased by companies owned by Brady. See IGS Realty Co., L.P. v. Brady , Index No. 603561/2009 (N.Y. Sup. Ct.). On June 26, 2015, a jury rendered a verdict in favor of IGS Realty and against Brady. Dkt. No. 131-14 ¶ 14. The jury unanimously found for IGS on its claim of breach of contract and against Brady on his claims that IGS had breached the implied warranty that the premises were fit for the uses stated in the lease and that IGS Realty fraudulently induced him to sign the leases and guarantees.
After Brady appealed, the New York state courts affirmed the jury verdict. On April 13, 2017, the Appellate Division, First Department, affirmed the Supreme Court's denial of Brady's motion to set aside the jury verdict. Id. ¶ 18; see IGS Realty Co., L.P. v. Brady , 149 A.D.3d 524, 52 N.Y.S.3d 320 (1st Dep't 2017). On June 7, 2018, the Appellate Division, First Department, denied Brady's motion that attacked the verdict. Dkt. No. 131-14 ¶ 19; see IGS Realty Co., L.P. v. Brady , 162 A.D.3d 444, 74 N.Y.S.3d 747 (1st Dep't 2018). On October 23, 2018, the New York State Court of Appeals rejected Brady's motion for re-argument and denied his application for leave to appeal. Dkt. No. 131-14 ¶ 20; see IGS Realty Co., L.P. v. Brady , 32 N.Y.3d 1053, 88 N.Y.S.3d 408, 113 N.E.3d 464 (2018).
Meanwhile, on July 29, 2016, IGS Realty retained Sheindlin to represent it at a hearing to settle the judgment and determine attorneys’ fees due from Brady. Dkt. No. 131-14 ¶¶ 2, 16. On May 31, 2017, IGS Realty, represented by Sheindlin, filed judgment against Brady in the amount of $1,458,002.33. Id. ¶ 17. On October 27, 2017, IGS Realty filed a petition to enforce the judgment. Id. ¶ 21. On May 23, 2018, the state court issued an order directing Brady to turn over the shares and proprietary leases in his commercial cooperative units and directing that a public action be conducted and that the sale proceeds be distributed to satisfy any judgment debtor or lien holder. Id. ¶ 23. On September 5, 2018, prior to the public auction, Brady sold his commercial cooperative apartment for approximately $9.5 million. Id. ¶ 24. Each of the judgment debtors were paid from the process of this sale at the closing. Id. ¶ 25. Pursuant to a court order, IGS Realty collected $1,705,535.71 to satisfy the judgment. Id. ¶¶ 3, 26. On September 19, 2018, a satisfaction of judgment was filed in the state-court action. Id. ¶ 28.
Meanwhile, Brady initiated a series of pro se actions stemming from the adverse state-court decision in the IGS Realty matter.1 On September 17, 2018, Brady sued Geoffrey Berman ("Berman"), United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, bringing claims pursuant to the Due Process Clause, the Equal Protection Clause, two criminal statutes, and the Freedom of Information Act. See Brady v. Berman , 2019 WL 4534421, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 18, 2019) ; see also Brady v. Berman , 18-cv-8459 (S.D.N.Y.), ECF No. 1. In part, Brady sought an injunction compelling Berman to protect him from the consequences of the IGS Realty litigation, which Brady characterized as "crimes." Brady v. Berman , 2019 WL 4534421, at *1. The court dismissed the claims in part because Brady lacked standing to challenge a prosecutor's failure to investigate or to prosecute other individuals. Id. at *2.
On July 30, 2019, Brady sued Barry R. Ostrager, a Justice of the New York Supreme Court, alleging that Justice Ostrager violated Brady's constitutional rights as the presiding judge in the IGS Realty matter. See Brady v. Ostrager , 19-cv-7122 (S.D.N.Y.), ECF No. 2; see also id. , ECF No. 6. Brady alleged "that the judge refused to adjudicate certain issues, had no jurisdiction to preside over [Brady's] 2015 trial, colluded with the landlord's attorney during trial, fabricated a jury charge, had no jurisdiction to hear [Brady's] case and colluded with higher court judges." Brady v. Ostrager , 19-cv-7122 (S.D.N.Y.), ECF No. 6, at 2. He also alleged that Justice Ostrager retaliated against him for maintaining a website "which provides a documentary history of corruption in the New York Court System" and for making numerous YouTube videos "in which he discusses the collusion between judges and politicians, and the consequences for the judiciary." Id. On August 20, 2019, the complaint was dismissed as barred by judicial immunity and the Rooker-Feldman doctrine.2 Id. at 6; see also Brady v. Ostrager , 834 F. Appx 616, 617 (2d Cir. 2020) (summary order) (affirming district court's dismissal of the complaint).
On October 31, 2019, Brady sued IGS Realty and another individual, bringing claims, inter alia , of fraud, breach of contract, negligence, and a conspiracy to interfere with civil rights in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1985 based on the IGS Realty matter in state court. See Brady v. IGS Realty Co. L.P. , 19-cv-10142 (S.D.N.Y.), ECF No. 1; Brady v. IGS Realty Co. L.P. , 2020 WL 5414683, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 8, 2020).
On August 13, 2020, Brady posted three videos on YouTube that were titled "Video #1: Judge Judy's son Gregory Sheindlin stealing over $1.7 million dollars on September 5, 2018"; "Video #2: Judge Judy's son Gregory Sheindlin stealing over $1.7 million dollars on September 5, 2018"; and "Video #3: Judge Judy's son Gregory Sheindlin stealing over $1.7 million dollars on September 5, 2018." Dkt. No. 131-14 ¶¶ 6, 55; see also Dkt. No. 130 ("Sheindlin Decl."), Exs. 1–3. The videos were posted with public visibility. Dkt. No. 131-14 ¶¶ 54–55. Viewers posted negative comments about Sheindlin in response to the video, and Brady replied to many of these comments on an ongoing basis. Id. ¶ 56. For example, he posted the following replies to comments posted under the videos:
On August 30, 2020, Brady sued Sheindlin and Sheindlin's law firm for damages he allegedly suffered when the state court judgment in the IGS Realty matter was obtained and enforced. See Brady v. Sheindlin , 20-cv-7047 (S.D.N.Y.), ECF No. 1; Brady v. Sheindlin , 2021 WL 737458, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 25, 2021). The case was assigned to this Court. "The essence of [Brady's] claim ... is that there were a variety of improprieties in the State Court Action of which [Sheindlin and Sheindlin's law firm] were aware and as a result, the Judgment should not have been entered against him." Brady v. Sheindlin , 2021 WL 737458, at *1.
On September 8, 2020, Judge Engelmayer dismissed all of Brady's claims in Brady v. IGS Realty Co. L.P. , 2020 WL 5414683, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 8, 2020). In recounting the IGS Realty state-court case, the court stated that "the jury found for IGS Realty on each claim" and "found that Brady had breached his contract to IGS Realty by not paying the rent amounts owed under his guarantees (the ‘Personal Guarantees’), and that IGS Realty had not ‘breached the implied warranty that the premises were fit for use in the lease’ or ‘fraudulently induced [Brady] to sign the leases and guarantees.’ " Id. The court also stated that the jury "rejected Brady's defense to breach that IGS Realty had constructively evicted him through its own breaches of the lease terms." Id. In dismissing Brady's claims that challenged the validity of the Personal Guarantees underlying the judgment against Brady in the state-court IGS Realty matter, the court held that the claims were barred by the Rooker-Feldman doctrine, res judicata , and collateral estoppel. Id. at *4.
On October 13, 2020, about a month after dismissing Brady's claims in Brady v. IGS Realty , Judge Engelmayer entered a filing injunction against Brady. See Brady v. IGS Realty Co. L.P. , 2020 WL 6049649, at *5 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 13, 2020). In determining whether to impose a filing injunction, the court considered five factors:
(1) the litigant's history of litigation and in particular whether it entailed vexatious, harassing or duplicative lawsuits; (2) the litigant's motive in pursuing the litigation, e.g. , does the litigant have an objective good faith expectation of prevailing?; (3) whether the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Girl Scouts of the U.S. v. Boy Scouts of Am.
-
Carroll v. Trump
... ... purposes of resolving this motion ... [ 12 ] Dkt67(Def. Mem.) at 1 ... [ 13 ] Sheindlin v. Brady, 597 ... F.Supp.3d 607, 629 (S.D.N.Y. 2022) ... [ 14 ] D'Annunzio v. Ayken, ... Inc., 876 F.Supp.2d 211, 217 (E.D.N.Y ... ...