Miami Developer Sues Law Firm, Shareholder Over Failed Real Estate Project
Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney faces a $15 million suit from developer Avra Jain over a failed investment in Doral.
November 29, 2017 at 11:59 AM
24 minute read
Miami Developer Avra Jain filed a malpractice and breach of fiduciary duty lawsuit against Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney, seeking about $15 million from the firm and shareholder Richard A. Morgan.
Jain is a Wall Street financier-turned-developer, known for transforming warehouses to lofts and condominiums, and revamping motels on Biscayne Boulevard near downtown Miami. But after a courtroom defeat in a multimillion-dollar spat with a onetime partner, Jain wants the court to hold her former lawyers responsible for what she suggests is an amateur litigation mistake. She claims Buchanan Ingersoll attorneys failed to ensure the plaintiff in the case against her had the signed financial document at the center of the dispute.
“The requirement to put the original promissory note into evidence is something that's a very basic and fundamental requirement under Florida law,” said her attorney Bruce Weil of Boies Schiller Flexner.
Buchanan Ingersoll spokeswoman Ela Voluck declined comment, and the firm has not responded to the lawsuit.
Jain and fellow investors Paul Cashman Murphy and defunct H-H Investments LLC were defendants in a February 2009 suit by former business associate Abraham Cohen, who alleged they owed him more than $4 million for his stake in a failed real estate venture. They lost at trial, and again before a state judicial panel when the Third District Court of Appeal ruled largely in their opponent's favor on April 19.
Cohen claimed the group agreed to pay $5 million for his 20.3 percent membership interest in Blueview LLC, a company developing a luxury condominium project near a landmark Trump-branded property in Doral. He alleged they contracted in June 2007 and paid $950,000 but stopped paying in 2008—right around the time the housing bubble burst. He sued H-H Investments to collect on the promissory note and sought to enforce the guaranty against Murphy and Jain.
“The guaranty follows the promissory note,” Weil said. “So if there is no promissory note, there is no guaranty.”
Jain and other defendants in the underlying case filed a counterclaim for fraud and misrepresentation, among other causes of action, alleging Cohen saddled them with a failing development that ultimately reverted to the mezzanine lender. They accused Cohen of lying about the project's viability to induce their participation, then deceiving them about the reason for his exit.
Jain told her former Buchanan Ingersoll attorneys “Cohen has recognized the issues and that he tore up the original note,” according to the legal malpractice suit filed Nov. 20 in Miami-Dade Circuit Court.
“The allegation is that her lawyers failed to object or raise the fact that the plaintiffs in the underlying action didn't have the original promissory note,” Weil said.
Cohen prevailed before Miami-Dade Circuit Judge Jacqueline Hogan Scola, who in January entered a nearly $8.2 million final judgment in his favor. That judgment included nearly $4.1 million in principal, about $174,800 in interest from June 2007 to May 2008 and nearly $4 million more in interest through January. Cohen sought a bigger payday on appeal, but the Third DCA affirmed Scola's decision.
Now Jain wants a court to hold Buchanan Ingersoll and its shareholder responsible for the judgment, expenses and about $5 million in compensatory and consequential damages.
Court records show Morgan and fellow Buchanan Ingersoll shareholders Jennifer Olmedo-Rodriguez and Matthew J. Feeley represented Jain, Murphy and H-H Investment, but the malpractice lawsuit only names one partner. The malpractice complaint alleges Morgan inquired about the missing original note but never questioned its absence in official pleadings.
Miami Developer Avra Jain filed a malpractice and breach of fiduciary duty lawsuit against
Jain is a Wall Street financier-turned-developer, known for transforming warehouses to lofts and condominiums, and revamping motels on Biscayne Boulevard near downtown Miami. But after a courtroom defeat in a multimillion-dollar spat with a onetime partner, Jain wants the court to hold her former lawyers responsible for what she suggests is an amateur litigation mistake. She claims
“The requirement to put the original promissory note into evidence is something that's a very basic and fundamental requirement under Florida law,” said her attorney Bruce Weil of
Jain and fellow investors Paul Cashman Murphy and defunct H-H Investments LLC were defendants in a February 2009 suit by former business associate Abraham Cohen, who alleged they owed him more than $4 million for his stake in a failed real estate venture. They lost at trial, and again before a state judicial panel when the Third District Court of Appeal ruled largely in their opponent's favor on April 19.
Cohen claimed the group agreed to pay $5 million for his 20.3 percent membership interest in Blueview LLC, a company developing a luxury condominium project near a landmark Trump-branded property in Doral. He alleged they contracted in June 2007 and paid $950,000 but stopped paying in 2008—right around the time the housing bubble burst. He sued H-H Investments to collect on the promissory note and sought to enforce the guaranty against Murphy and Jain.
“The guaranty follows the promissory note,” Weil said. “So if there is no promissory note, there is no guaranty.”
Jain and other defendants in the underlying case filed a counterclaim for fraud and misrepresentation, among other causes of action, alleging Cohen saddled them with a failing development that ultimately reverted to the mezzanine lender. They accused Cohen of lying about the project's viability to induce their participation, then deceiving them about the reason for his exit.
Jain told her former
“The allegation is that her lawyers failed to object or raise the fact that the plaintiffs in the underlying action didn't have the original promissory note,” Weil said.
Cohen prevailed before Miami-Dade Circuit Judge
Now Jain wants a court to hold
Court records show Morgan and fellow
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllChicago Midsize Firm Will Combine With Miami Boutique To Form Antitrust Powerhouse
3 minute readAkerman Opens Charlotte Office With Focus on Renewable Energy, Data Center Practices
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Read the Document: 'Google Must Divest Chrome,' DOJ Says, Proposing Remedies in Search Monopoly Case
- 2Voir Dire Voyeur: I Find Out What Kind of Juror I’d Be
- 3When It Comes to Local Law 97 Compliance, You’ve Gotta Have (Good) Faith
- 4Legal Speak at General Counsel Conference East 2024: Virginia Griffith, Director of Business Development at OutsideGC
- 5Legal Speak at General Counsel Conference East 2024: Bill Tanenbaum, Partner & Chair, AI & Data Law Practice Group at Moses Singer
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250