The following e-filed documents, listed by NYSCEF document number (Motion 023) 680, 681, 682, 683, 685, 686, 687, 688, 689, 690, 691, 692, 693, 694, 695, 696, 697, 698, 699, 700, 701, 702, 703, 704, 705, 706, 707, 708, 709, 710, 711, 712, 713, 714, 715, 716, 717 were read on this motion to/for MISCELLANEOUS. DECISION ORDER ON MOTION In this contract action, The Ideal Supply Company (“Plaintiff”) moves for an order (i) directing certification of this matter as a class action; (ii) defining the class as all beneficiaries of the Lien Law Article 3-A Trust Funds received by Interstate Fire Protection, Inc. (“IFP”),1 Peter M. Mirz (“Mirz”), Richard W. Tully (“Tully”), Myron Bellovin (“Bellovin”), and Pace Plumbing Corp. (“Pace”) in connection with thirteen private construction projects in the state of New York (“the Projects”), for which the proposed class members “provided labor and materials” as defined under the Lien Law; (iii) waiving the requirements of CPLR §901 (1) (a) pursuant to the provisions of Lien Law §77; and (iv) directing Mirz, Tully, Bellovin and Pace to provide a list of all Lien Law Article 3-A Trust Fund beneficiaries to Plaintiff in the event that they have not already done so. Interstate Mechanical Services, Inc. (“IMS”), Bellovin, and Tully (collectively “the IMS Defendants”) oppose Plaintiff’s motion and also cross-move, pursuant to CPLR 3211(a), for an order dismissing the proposed Fourth Amended Complaint (“the complaint”) as against them all or, in the alternative, for an order dismissing the complaint only as against IMS. Pace joins in the cross motions by the IMS Defendants. Mirz separately opposes Plaintiff’s motion and also cross-moves for an order dismissing the complaint as against him. I. Factual and Procedural Background In the complaint,2 Plaintiff asserts a first cause of action for an accounting only against Mirz, seeking to have him account for and disclose the disposition of all monies and proceeds received in connection with the Projects. Plaintiff’s second cause of action is for trust fund diversion against the IMS Defendants, Mirz, and Pace (Doc 684). Plaintiff asserts that it supplied plumbing materials to IFP, which was a subcontractor, for a series of construction or renovation projects in New York City in 2011 and 2012 (“the Projects”). IFP was unable to complete the Projects because of a severe economic downturn. However, IFP, through its officers and shareholders Mirz, Tully, and Bellovin, and with the assistance of IMS, a corporate entity, and Pace, a subcontractor, allegedly received the money for the completion of the Projects and failed to pay Plaintiff (id.
16, 44, 45,
