NJ Real Estate Investor Sues in Two States Over Failed Engagement
The real estate investor filed lawsuits in New Jersey and Miami.
June 04, 2020 at 09:00 AM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Daily Business Review
A wealthy New Jersey real estate investor is embroiled in a nasty spat over a $1.45 million condo and a diamond engagement ring.
Jeremy Grunin showered Marcia Gomez with expensive gifts during the brief time they were dating each other, beyond just the apartment and the diamond ring, according to court pleadings filed in Florida. The Miami-Dade Circuit Court lawsuit concerns the $1.45 million Aria On The Bay condominium, which Gruin claimed was titled "as joint tenants with the right of survivorship" on the condition of the former couple's planned marriage. Grunin, represented by Michael Kreitzer, a partner at Greenberg Traurig in Miami, asserts causes of action based upon alleged breach of implied in-law contract and unjust enrichment, and sought a declaratory judgment.
Grunin filed a separate lawsuit in Monmouth County Superior Court's Chancery Division seeking the return of the $290,000 engagement ring he gave to Gomez. Under New Jersey law, an engagement ring is a conditional gift that must be returned if the "condition" of marriage has not been fulfilled.
Grunin alleges he met Gomez through Millionaire Matchmaker, a service that matches wealthy women with wealthy men. Grunin was recently divorced and sought a partner to be his lifetime companion and soul mate, "not just a one-time or occasional sexual connection."
Eduardo I. Rasco, a partner at Rosenthal Rosenthal Rasco in Aventura, Florida, who is representing Gomez, said the pair met on a different website called Luxy. Current members on Luxy must ratify new members based on appearance and wealth. And soon after the pair met, Rasco alleged Grunin wanted assurance that Gomez knew just how wealthy he was.
"He insisted that she Google his name to see exactly who he is," Rasco said. "Within a week, he asked her to provide him with any debts she may have so he can satisfy them to prove his true love for her. She disclosed a hundred thousand dollar debt, which he promptly paid off."
The complaint stated that after a few dates, the pair fell in love with each other and began to talk about marriage. During this time, Rasco said that Grunin showered his client with "gift after gift, after gift, after gift, after gift."
Gomez discovered Grunin had an odd belief that the 27th day of each month was his lucky day, according to her attorney.
According to Gomez's pleadings, the former couple met in person on April 27. One month later, on May 27, Grunin gave Gomez a yellow diamond tennis bracelet and placed a down payment on a contract to purchase a $1.4 million condominium in Miami.
A month after that, on June 27, Grunin paid a deposit on the diamond in the amount of $290,000. Grunin and Gomez went on vacation to the Dominican Republic on July 27. A Cayman Islands vacation followed that on Aug. 27. Grunin proposed to Gomez on Sept. 27. And the ultimate breakup happened Nov. 27.
The complaint alleged the breakup happened because Grunin began to see Gomez had a "dark-side that was repugnant" to Grunin. At the same time, Rasco contended that the breakup occurred based on a disagreement over their engagement party and the size of the guest list. Rasco said Grunin wanted Gomez to be a "more willing and subservient participant."
Soon after the "termination of the engagement," Grunin claimed it was a joint agreement to end the engagement, while Gomez claims Grunin ended it. Grunin asked Gomez to return the engagement ring he bought her.
Grunin also asked that she transfer her interest in the Aria Apartment to Grunin because he is the "rightful owner" and made all the payments himself, according to the complaint. He filed the lawsuit, according to his pleadings, because Gomez has failed to comply with repeated requests for the delivery of a deed transferring title to the apartment solely to him.
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 AllThe Real Estate Consumer Protection Enhancement Act Brings Industry Change
9 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Data Breach Lawsuit Against Byte Federal Among 1,500 Targeting Companies in 2024
- 2Counterfeiters Ride Surge in Tabletop Games’ Popularity, Challenging IP Owners to Keep Up
- 3Health Care Data Breach Class Actions Saw December Surge in NY Courts
- 4Florida Supreme Court Disbars 3, Suspends 11, Reprimands 1 in Final Disciplinary Order of 2024
- 5Chief Justice Roberts Ends Year With Defense Against 'Illegitimate' Attacks on Judiciary
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