3547-3551. NICHOLAS ROMANOFF, ETC, plf-ap, v. SHERYL ROMANOFF, ETC def-res — JOHN AND JANE DOES “1″ THROUGH “10″, ETC., def — Law Office of James M. Haddad, New York (James M. Haddad of counsel), for ap — Venturini & Associates, New York (August C. Venturini of counsel), for Sheryl Romanoff, GHC NY Corp. and New Roads Realty Corp., res — Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith LLP, New York (Cristina R. Yannucci of counsel), for Michael A. Zimmerman, res — Loeb & Loeb LLP, New York (David M. Satnick of counsel), for 55 Gans Judgment LLC, 55 Gans Lender LLC and Griffon Gansevoort Holdings LLC, res — Abrams Garfinkel Margolis Bergson LLP, New York (Robert J. Bergson of counsel), for Frank Platt, res — Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Anil C. Singh, J.), entered September 29, 2014, which granted the motion by defendants 55 Gans Judgment LLC (Gans Judgment), 55 Gans Lender LLC (Gans Lender), Griffon Gansevoort Holdings LLC’s (Griffon, together with Gans Judgment and Gans Lender, the Gans defendants) to dismiss the fourth cause of action for rescission, unanimously affirmed. Orders, same court and Justice, entered February 5, 2015, which, insofar as appealed from as limited by the briefs, (a) granted defendant Michael Zimmerman’s motion to dismiss the complaint, (b) granted so much of the motion by defendants Gerald Romanoff1 (Gerald), Sheryl Romanoff (Sheryl), New Roads Realty Corp. (New Roads), and GHC NY Corp.’s (GHC) to dismiss the complaint as sought dismissal of the complaint as against Sheryl, those portions of the first cause of action that seek recovery for wrongs that occurred before February 7, 2011, those portions of the third cause of action that seek recovery against Gerald in relation to GHC and for transactions preceding January 4, 2009, and the fourth, fifth, and sixth causes of action; and (c) denied plaintiff’s motion for leave to amend the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs. Order, same court and Justice, entered October 22, 2015, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, granted the Gans defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint against them, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
In this derivative action, plaintiff Nicholas Romanoff, a 1 percent shareholder in New Roads, which entity, through a wholly owned subsidiary, GHC, owns a five-story commercial building in Manhattan, seeks damages and to set aside a conveyance of real property based upon, inter alia, alleged breaches of fiduciary duty by his now deceased grandfather, Gerald Romanoff, whose action were allegedly aided and abetted by the other defendants.
