From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Allstate Ins. Co. v. Polack

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Sep 28, 2012
08-CV-565(ADS)(ETB) (E.D.N.Y. Sep. 28, 2012)

Opinion

08-CV-565(ADS)(ETB)

09-28-2012

ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, ALLSTATE INDEMNITY COMPANY, ALLSTATE PROPERTY AND CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, ALLSTATE NEW JERSEY INSURANCE COMPANY, CONTINENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY, DEERBROOK INSURANCE COMPANY, ENCOMPASS INDEMNITY COMPANY, THE GLENS FALLS INSURANCE COMPANY, and NATIONAL BEN FRANKLIN INSURANCE COMPANY OF ILLINOIS, Plaintiffs, v. INNA POLACK, ALEXANDER POLACK, YULIY GOLDMAN, MIGHTY MANAGEMENT GROUP, INC., MIGHTY MANAGEMENT, LLC, BLUE WAVE MANAGEMENT, INC., NATALYA SHVARTSMAN, EMMANUEL KUCHEROVSKY, AND SHAUN ROBINSON a/k/a "PRINCE", Defendants.

Smith & Brink, P.C. Attorneys for Plaintiffs By: Richard Steigman, Esq., Michael W. Whitcher, Esq., Nathan A. Tilden, Esq., Richard D. King, Esq., Of Counsel Belesi Donovan & Conroy Attorneys for Inna Polack, Alexander Polack, Natalya Shvartsman, Mighty Management Group, Inc., Mighty Management, LLC By: Maria Campese Diglio, Esq., Of Counsel NO APPEARANCES: Defendants Yuliy Goldman, Blue Wave Management, Inc., Emmanuel Kucherovsky, Shaun Robinson a/k/a "Prince"


ORDER

APPEARANCES: Smith & Brink, P.C.
Attorneys for Plaintiffs

By: Richard Steigman, Esq.,

Michael W. Whitcher, Esq.,

Nathan A. Tilden, Esq.,

Richard D. King, Esq., Of Counsel
Belesi Donovan & Conroy
Attorneys for Inna Polack, Alexander Polack, Natalya Shvartsman, Mighty Management Group, Inc.,
Mighty Management, LLC

By: Maria Campese Diglio, Esq., Of Counsel NO APPEARANCES: Defendants Yuliy Goldman, Blue Wave Management, Inc., Emmanuel Kucherovsky, Shaun
Robinson a/k/a "Prince"

SPATT, District Judge.

On February 28, 2008, the plaintiffs commenced this action against the defendants, asserting claims under the Racketeer and Influenced Corrupt Organizations Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961, et seq., as well as state law. On April 2, 2012, the Court referred this matter to United States Magistrate Judge E. Thomas Boyle, for a report and recommendation as to the amount of damages, attorneys' fees, and costs to be awarded following the entry of a default judgment against Inna Polack, Alexander Polack, Natalya Shvartsman, Emmanuel Kucherovsky, Yuliy Goldman, Shaun Robinson a/k/a "Prince", Mighty Management Group, Inc., Mighty Management, LLC, Blue Wave Management, Inc., and Prestige Management Group, Inc.

Subsequently, the plaintiffs withdrew their motions for a default judgment against Shaun Robinson a/k/a "Prince", Natalya Shvartsman, Emmanuel Kucherovsky, Mighty Management Group, Inc., Mighty Management, LLC, Blue Wave Management, Inc., and Prestige Management Group, Inc. (Docket #'s 477 & 478.)

On September 12, 2012, Judge Boyle issued a Report and Recommendation ("the Report") recommending that the Court award damages to the plaintiffs as follows: (1) $7,181,367.41 against Inna Polack, jointly and severally, for payments made to A.R. Medical Art, P.C. between 2000 and 2006, and for payments made to A.R. Medical Rehabilitation, P.C. between 2000 and 2004; (2) $5,021,446.52 against Alexander Polack, jointly and severally, for payments made to A.R. Medical Art, P.C. between 2000 and 2006; and (3) $1,882,188.38 against Yuliy Goldman, jointly and severally, for payments made to the second location of A.R. Medical Art, P.C. between 2002 and 2003. (Report at 16.) In addition, Judge Boyle recommended that the Court dismiss this action with prejudice with respect to Shaun Robinson a/k/a "Prince", Natalya Shvartsman, Emmanuel Kucherovsky, Mighty Management Group, Inc., Mighty Management, LLC, Blue Wave Management, Inc., and Prestige Management Group, Inc. To date, there have been no objections filed to the Report.

In reviewing a report and recommendation, a court "may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge." 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1)(C). "To accept the report and recommendation of a magistrate, to which no timely objection has been made, a district court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record." Wilds v. United Parcel Serv., 262 F. Supp. 2d 163, 169 (S.D.N.Y. 2003) (citing Nelson v. Smith, 618 F. Supp. 1186, 1189 (S.D.N.Y. 1985)). The Court has reviewed Judge Boyle's Report and finds it be persuasive and without any legal or factual errors. There being no objection to Judge Boyle's Report, it is hereby:

ORDERED, that Judge Boyle's Report and Recommendation is adopted in its entirety. The Court awards to the plaintiffs damages as follows: (1) $7,181,367.41 against Inna Polack, jointly and severally; (2) $5,021,446.52 against Alexander Polack, jointly and severally; and (3) $1,882,188.38 against Yuliy Goldman, jointly and severally. In addition, the Court dismisses this action as against Shaun Robinson a/k/a "Prince", Natalya Shvartsman, Emmanuel Kucherovsky, Mighty Management Group, Inc., Mighty Management, LLC, Blue Wave Management, Inc., and Prestige Management Group, Inc., with prejudice, and it is further,

ORDERED, that the Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment in favor of the plaintiffs as set forth above, and it is further

ORDERED, that the Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case.

SO ORDERED.

Dated: Central Islip, New York

September 28, 2012

______________

ARTHUR D. SPATT

United States District Judge


Summaries of

Allstate Ins. Co. v. Polack

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Sep 28, 2012
08-CV-565(ADS)(ETB) (E.D.N.Y. Sep. 28, 2012)
Case details for

Allstate Ins. Co. v. Polack

Case Details

Full title:ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, ALLSTATE INDEMNITY COMPANY, ALLSTATE PROPERTY…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

Date published: Sep 28, 2012

Citations

08-CV-565(ADS)(ETB) (E.D.N.Y. Sep. 28, 2012)

Citing Cases

AR Med. Rehab., P.C. v. GEICO Gen. Ins. Co.

The defendant posited that there were prior rulings from different court proceedings that when taken together…

AR Med. Rehab., P.C. v. GEICO Gen. Ins. Co.

The defendant posited that there were prior rulings from different court proceedings that when taken together…