Attorney Adam Hurvitz Russ's Legal Cases

Contracts and agreements

Clarendon Nat'l Ins. Co. v. Advance Underwriting Managers Agency, Inc. et al.

Dec 08, 2011

OUTCOME: Judgment for Plaintiff - Plaintiff awarded damages in the amount of $605,924.69 and attorneys' fees in the amount of $109,504.65.

Plaintiff and Defendants entered into an agency agreement under which AUM would manage Plaintiff’s insurance policies on a commission basis. The individual defendants guaranteed AUM’s obligations under ... the agency agreement. Commission was paid in advance and, in the event that AUM underperformed, the advance commission resulted in overcompensation and any overages had to be repaid. Consequently, a provision requiring repayment of overpaid commission was included in the agreement as well as a clause awarding attorneys’ fees and costs related to the recovery of any overpaid commission. See 2011 WL 6153691.

Bankruptcy and debt

Clarendon Nat'l Ins. Co. v. Rudy Raymond Lizardi, et al.

Jun 03, 2011

OUTCOME: Judgment for Plaintiff against all Defendants, jointly and severally, for the total sum of $5,227,393 and finding by Court that debt is nondischargable as to each Defendant under 11 USC Sec. 523(a)(6).

Defendants fraudulently over-billed Plaintiff for insurance claims adjusting fees. Following an audit by Plaintiff, the fraudulent over-billing was discovered and Plaintiff commenced a lawsuit against ... Defendants for a return of the fraudulently billed fees and obtained a pre-trial Writ of Attachment on Defendants' assets. In violation of the Writ, Defendants proceeded to systematically dispose of their assets and destroy their financial records. Then Defendants filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy protection in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of California, Los Angeles Division. Plaintiff initiated an adversary proceeding against Defendants and, following a trial, obtained a judgment against all of the defendants for over $5.2 million of the stolen sums and denying the discharge of Defendants' debt to Plaintiff.

Litigation

Motel in the Sky, Inc. v. Wald

N/A

OUTCOME: Summary Judgment For Plaintiff - Judgment Affirmed on Appeal

Plaintiff owner of the disputed property moved for summary judgment on its claim for permanent injunction arguing defendant adjoining property owner could not establish adverse possession. The Court f ... ound plaintiff established that the premises were not usually cultivated or improved consistent with its character, condition or location. It noted defendant could not claim adverse possession based on the storage and/or dumping of unused and unusable vehicles, and general pieces of "junk" on the property. The Court concluded the evidence demonstrated the premises were not protected by any enclosure erected by defendant, substantial or otherwise, and defendant failed to raise an issue of fact in this regard. Thus, it ruled defendant failed to meet the elements necessary to establish adverse possession, granting plaintiff's motion for summary judgment. Defendant was ordered to remove all items from the premises and was also barred from entry onto the premises. Decision of the Day in the New York Law Journal, December 3, 2008. Sustained on Appeal: Skyview Motel, LLC v. Wald, 82 A.D.3d 1081 (2d Dep't 2011) (Claimant/Defendant failed to demonstrate that he cultivated or improved disputed real property, or that property was substantially enclosed, and thus claimant did not acquire property through adverse possession, where adverse possession was not founded upon written instrument.)

Litigation

Brian Ramnarine v. Kensington Abstract, LLC, et al.

N/A

OUTCOME: Summary Judgment For Defendant

This case concerns a dispute over the ownership and control of a certain piece of commercial property. The plaintiff claimed to be the owner of the property and sought to rescind a sale of the prope ... rty to unrelated purchasers by his son, acting as the President of a corporate entity title holder. Plaintiff further sued numerous parties that participated in the disputed sale transaction including Kensington Abstract, LLC, the title abstractor, under various theories seeking damages. Following discovery, the court found that defendant Kensington Abstract LLC had demonstrated its entitlement to an award of summary judgment dismissing plaintiff's complaint against it. The plaintiff was unable to substantiate or prove any of its claims against defendant Kensington Abstract, LLC.

Adam Hurvitz Russ's Legal Cases (4)

Clarendon Nat'l Ins. Co. v. Advance Underwriting Managers Agency, Inc. et al.

Clarendon Nat'l Ins. Co. v. Rudy Raymond Lizardi, et al.

Motel in the Sky, Inc. v. Wald

Brian Ramnarine v. Kensington Abstract, LLC, et al.