Ricatto v. M3 Innovations Unlimited, Inc.

District Court, S.D. New York·Decided January 18, 2024·No. 1:18-cv-08404·Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK DAVID S. NEUFELD, in his capacity as Curator of the Estate of Michael Ricatto, Plaintiff-Counterclaim Defendant, 18 Civ. 8404 (KPF) -v.- ORDER M3 INNOVATIONS UNLIMITED INC., Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff. KATHERINE POLK FAILLA, District Judge: It is hereby ORDERED that: 1. All proceedings in this case are STAYED for a period of 150 days from the date of this Order, pending a possible final settlement of all claims between the parties;

2. Unless the case is earlier dismissed, the Parties shall file a status report on or before June 24, 2024; and 3. The parties shall comply with the terms of the Settlement Agreement annexed hereto as Exhibit A, and incorporated by reference in this Order. See Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am., 511 U.S. 375, 381 (1994). The Court will retain jurisdiction to enforce the Settlement Agreement. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate the pending motions at docket

entries 150, 153, 156, and 162. SO ORDERED. Dated: January 18, 2024 Mo filo New York, New York KATHERINE POLK FAILLA United States District Judge

Exhibit A UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

DAVID S. NEUFELD, in his capacity as Curator of the Estate of Michael Ricatto,

Plaintiff-Counterclaim Defendant, No. 18 CV 8404 (KPF) - v -

M3 INNOVATIONS UNLIMITED INC.,

Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff.

SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT This Settlement Agreement (the “Settlement Agreement”) is dated January 18, 2024 (the “Effective Date”), between David S. Neufeld, in his capacity as personal representative of the Estate of Michael Ricatto (the “Estate”), M3 Innovations Unlimited, Inc. (“M3”), and Kyle Kietrys. The Estate, M3, and Mr. Kietrys, together are referred to as the “Parties.” WHEREAS, on or about September 14, 2018, Mr. Michael Ricatto (“Mr. Ricatto”) commenced a lawsuit styled Ricatto v. M3 Innovations Unlimited, Inc. et al., Case No. 18-CV- 8404 (KPF), in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (the “Lawsuit”) by filing a complaint against M3, its CEO, Mr. Kietrys, and John and Jane “Doe” defendants (collectively, the “Underlying Defendants”); WHEREAS, on or about January 7, 2019, Mr. Ricatto filed an amended complaint in the Lawsuit; WHEREAS, by Order dated December 6, 2019, the Court dismissed Mr. Ricatto’s three-count Amended Complaint against the Underlying Defendants (ECF Doc. 40); WHEREAS, on or about March 1, 2019, M3 filed an answer asserting counterclaims in the Lawsuit against Mr. Ricatto; WHEREAS, by Order dated March 16, 2022, (ECF Doc. 115), the Court granted M3’s motion for partial summary judgment on its claim for breach of contract as to liability only, (see ECF Doc. 118), and denied Mr. Ricatto’s motion for summary judgment as to M3’s claims, (ECF Docs. 115, 118);

WHEREAS, Mr. Ricatto died in or about March 2023, (ECF Doc. 124); WHEREAS, on or about July 13, 2023, the Circuit Court of the 17th Judicial Circuit in and for Broward County, Florida (the “Probate Court”) appointed Mr. David S. Neufeld as Curator of the Estate of Mr. Ricatto, in a case captioned In Re: Estate of: Ricatto, Michael P, Case No. PRC230001483 (the “Probate Action”), with authority, inter alia, to prosecute or defend claims in any jurisdiction for the protection of the Estate (see ECF Doc. 140); WHEREAS, on or about July 31, 2023, the Court granted M3’s motion to substitute David S. Neufeld, in his capacity as Curator of the Estate of Michael Ricatto, as the new

Plaintiff-Counterclaim Defendant in the Lawsuit, and terminated Mr. Ricatto, the former Plaintiff-Counterclaim Defendant, as a party to the Lawsuit, (ECF Doc. 140); WHEREAS, on or about January 9, 2024, the court in the Probate Action discharged Mr. David S. Neufeld as Curator of the Estate of Michael Ricatto and appointed Mr. David S. Neufeld as Personal Representative of the Estate of Michael Ricatto; WHEREAS, on or about January 10, 2024, the court in the Probate Action filed Letters of Administration, stating in part that “there shall be no sale, transfer or distribution of any estate asset without Court order”; WHEREAS, a trial of M3’s claims against the Estate is set to commence on February

5, 2024, at 9:00 a.m. in Courtroom 618 of the Thurgood Marshall Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, New York, NY, (ECF Doc. 141); WHEREAS, the Parties have opposed the claims and counterclaims asserted and to be asserted in the Lawsuit, have denied and continue to deny all liability to one another, and have asserted and would continue to assert defenses; WHEREAS, the Parties have agreed to settle and fully dispose of the Lawsuit, and all

other claims that each Party has or had or may have, whether known or unknown, against the other (excluding claims for breach of this Settlement Agreement) by exchanging general releases, on the terms and in exchange for the consideration set forth herein; and WHEREAS, the Parties have agreed that the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York shall retain jurisdiction to enforce this Settlement Agreement, and mutually covenant to take all steps necessary or requested by the Court to effectuate such jurisdiction; NOW THEREFORE, in reliance on the above recitals, which the Parties represent and agree are true and correct and incorporated herein, and for other good and valuable

consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the Parties, intending to be legally bound, agree as follows: 1. Payment: The Estate agrees to pay M3 the sum of $3,125,000.00 (three million one hundred twenty-five thousand United States dollars) (the “Settlement Amount”), to be received by M3 within 120 days of the Effective Date. The Estate shall pay the Settlement Amount in good and available funds in the form of a wire transfer to the following Trust Account maintained by M3’s counsel or to such other account as M3 may designate by written notice in compliance with Paragraph 14 below: Bank: Bank Address:

Bank Account: Bank Routing: SWIFT Code: Account Name: Address:

2. Real Property Transfer: The Estate agrees to cause the transfer of the Real Property (as defined below) to M3 or its designated affiliate, with closing and transfer of title to the Real Property to occur within 120 days of the Effective Date (the “Closing”). Terms and deal structure for the Real Property Transfer (as defined below) and the Closing shall be confirmed in a definitive agreement to be negotiated in good faith by the Parties prior to the Closing (the “Real Property Closing Agreement”). For purposes of this Settlement Agreement, “Real Property” shall mean Parcel 1 (APN 3129-251-37-0-000) and Parcel 6 (APN 3129-251-42-0-000) of Parcel Map 19782, in the City of Adelanto, County of San Bernardino, State of California, as per map recorded in book 248, pages 73 and 74 of Parcel Maps, in the office of the county recorder of said county, and which parcels where thereafter conveyed to Golden State Lion, LLC (hereinafter “Estate Seller”) by deed dated September 15, 2017 (the “Deed”), a copy of which is annexed to this Settlement Agreement as Exhibit A. The transfer of Real Property described in this Paragraph, and referenced elsewhere in this Settlement Agreement, shall be referred to as the “Real Property Transfer”. a. The Estate agrees to pay or cause the Estate Seller to pay all reasonable costs arising from or related to the Real Property Transfer and/or the Closing, including (without limitation) documentary realty transfer or other taxes, fees, deed recording and other costs, and title insurance fees, provided, however, that M3 shall bear its own attorneys’ fees associated with the Real Property Transfer and the Closing. b.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Ricatto v. M3 Innovations Unlimited, Inc., (S.D.N.Y. 2024).

Ricatto v. M3 Innovations Unlimited, Inc. (Ricatto v. M3 Innovations Unlimited, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Insurance Co. of America
511 U.S. 375 (Supreme Court, 1994)