Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Avishai ABRAHAMI, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. Zeil FELDMAN, Defendant–Respondent, Nir Meir, Defendant.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Andrea Masley, J.) entered July 2, 2024, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, denied plaintiff's motion for summary judgment, unanimously affirmed, with costs.
Plaintiff loaned $30 million to nonparties HFZ Member RP Portfolio LLC and HFZ Member RB Acquisitions (the borrowers), owned by defendant Zeil Feldman. The loan documents included a carveout guaranty under which Feldman individually guaranteed the payment and performance of all carveout obligations. There is no dispute that defendant Nir Meir, the former managing principal of the borrowers, forged Feldman's signature on the carveout guaranty and misappropriated most of the loan proceeds.
Supreme Court correctly denied plaintiff's motion for summary judgment as against Feldman on the claims for breach of the carveout guaranty because questions of fact remain as to whether Feldman ratified the forged guaranty, and whether he benefitted from Meir's fraud (see Matter of Cologne Life Reins. Co. v. Zurich Reins. [N. Am.], Inc., 286 A.D.2d 118, 127, 730 N.Y.S.2d 61 [1st Dept. 2001]).
The record fails to conclusively establish when Feldman first learned that Meir had entered into the loan and carveout guaranty by forging Feldman's signature. Nor is it clear that the $250,000 distribution Feldman received immediately after the borrowers received the loan proceeds was connected to Meir's fraud, which would have required him to return those proceeds (see U.S. Bank N.A. v. Gutierrez, 136 A.D.3d 571, 571, 25 N.Y.S.3d 206 [1st Dept. 2016]; cf. YH Lex Estates LLC v. HFZ Capital Group LLC, 203 A.D.3d 417, 417–418, 160 N.Y.S.3d 580 [1st Dept. 2022]).
We have considered plaintiff's remaining contentions and find them unavailing.
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Docket No: 3798
Decided: February 27, 2025
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)