Kraemer v Edelstein 2025 NY Slip Op 30623(U) February 24, 2025 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: Index No. 153243/2024 Judge: Ariel D. Chesler is summed up simply “Plaintiff has come to this Court with nothing short of an unintelligible conspiracy theory not a cause of action.”

“Between 2014 and 2015, plaintiff was involved in a Housing Court proceeding with his landlord, Majestic Realty Corp. and his landlords the Edelstein defendants. Ultimately, in 2015 he was evicted from his apartment. In a series oflawsuits filed in the Southern District by plaintiff between 2014 and 2019, he alleged various claims against, among others, the Edelstein defendants, Majestic Realty Corporation, the New York City Department of Housing, Preservation, and Development (HPD), the New York State Division of Housing and Community Renewal (DHCR), the Housing Court Judge who presided over the eviction proceedings, and the city marshal who carried out the eviction.

As noted by Judge Loretta A. Preska in her 2014 decision, the “The gravamen of this complaint is that Defendants have negligently responded to Plaintiffs efforts to remedy the condition of his apartment” which had made been uninhabitable by mites. However, in other subsequent suits, plaintiff alleged that the landlord purposely pumped poison fumes into his apartment and also that HPD, the Housing Court Judge, and the marshal had failed to carry out their duties, committed fraud and/or engaged in other unlawful behavior. In one of the suits, Plaintiff alleged “that unnamed individuals drugged his daughter to prevent her from providing testimony, while also coercing her to testify; that unnamed individuals kidnapped his daughter to force him to stop pursuing an appeal; and that his ‘daughter was overdosed twice on appeal. And twice while in captivity until she convulsed causing permanent mental impairment.”‘ He further alleged “that there is far-reaching conspiracy to tamper with his lawsuits that began after he discovered, approximately 17 years ago, that his daughter was being abused.” Plaintiff asserted that his daughter was severely abused by individuals in Pennsylvania. Judge Preska dismissed plaintiffs various filings on numerous grounds, including lack of subject matter jurisdiction, failure to state a claim, and immunity. In her 2017 decision (see Kraemer v. Edelstein et al., No. 17-CV-2910 [LAP][S.D.N.Y. Sep. 19, 2017]), she also dismissed claims against defendant Florence Edelstein on the grounds of res judicata since virtually identical claims had been raised in earlier actions. To the extent plaintiff had pleaded state law claims, Judge Preska declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the same.”

“Plaintiff’s cause of action against Ms. Spitale must be dismissed as this Court lacks personal jurisdiction of Defendant Spitale. The claims against Spitale, who is an attorney who lives and practices in Pennsylvania, stem from her role as the court-appointed guardian of Plaintiff’s adult daughter, who is also a Pennsylvania resident. Plaintiff alleges that Spitale is involved in a child slave manufacturing business.

The entirety of the transactions and occurrences between Plaintiff and Defendant Spitale (none of which appear to be legal causes of action) occurred in the commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Defendant Spitale does not do business in the state of New York. She does not reside in New York. In sum, she has no contacts with New York to support a finding this forum has personal jurisdiction over Defendant Spitale. Accordingly, the Court may not exercise personal jurisdiction over Spitale under any provision of CPLR § 302(a), and dismissal pursuant to CPLR § 321 l(a)(8) is thus mandated. Further, because the situs of the alleged injury occurred in Pennsylvania-rather than New York-there is no jurisdiction under CPLR 302(a)(3) (i) and (ii).”