Affidavit From Employee Of Sister Company With Personal Knowledge Sufficient To Show Damages At Inquest

Posted: March 13, 2026 / Written by: Samuel L. Butt, Joshua Wurtzel, Channing J. Turner, Thomas A. Kissane / Categories Inquest, Loan, Attorney Fees

Affidavit From Employee Of Sister Company With Personal Knowledge Sufficient To Show Damages At Inquest

On December 28, 2025, Justice Melissa A. Crane granted plaintiff $45,906,293.43 in damages and $188,471.06 in fees and costs following an inquest. The case is Deutsche Bank AG, v. Rosenfeld, Index No. 659459/2024.

The Court had earlier granted plaintiff Deutsche Bank summary judgment on a $5,000,000 Payment Guaranty, and summary judgment as to liability only on a “Shortfall Guaranty” that allowed Deutsche Bank to recover for deficiencies in Tax Reserve Funds, Insurance Reserve Funds, and Required Monthly Debt Service Payments on the related loan. The inquest was to determine amounts due under the Shortfall Guaranty.

Plaintiff submitted an affidavit from Maria Almounir, the Vice President at Hanover Street Capital, together with a spreadsheet and invoices showing it had paid $41,843,188.33 for unpaid default interest on the loan principal, $3,862,326.40 for advanced real estate tax payments, and $200,778.70 for advanced insurance premiums. The Court found defendant’s objections unpersuasive:

. . . defendant first argues that plaintiff’s submissions are defective because “Ms. Almounir does not work for Situs Asset Management LLC, she has no personal knowledge concerning the servicing of the loan,” and “Ms. Almounir does not state that she is authorized to act as Deutsche Bank’s agent” (Doc 78, para 5). The court rejects this argument. Ms. Almounir states that Hanover Street is Situs Asset Management LLC’s “sister company,” Hanover Street “provides asset management services to Plaintiff Deutsche Bank AG, New York Branch,” and both Hanover and Situs are “wholly owned subsidiaries of SitusAMC Holdings Corporation” (Doc 67, para 1). The parent company, SitusAMC, “is retained by Deutsche Bank to provide . . . loan primary servicing and loan oversight services in connection with subject loans for the [underlying] property” (id., para 2). She submits her affirmation “based upon personal knowledge” (id., para 3). This is sufficient.

Next, defendant argues that plaintiff miscalculates the advance tax payments because tax grievances were submitted for tax years 2022, 2023, and 2024 (Doc 78, paras 6-7). Thus, plaintiff may have overpaid those taxes (id., para 8). This is not a basis to overcome plaintiff’s entitlement to damages for the tax payments. As of now, plaintiff has paid taxes defendant should have paid. If the tax grievances are resolved such that a refund is issued, defendant will be entitled to an offset. Accordingly, the court awards plaintiff $45,906,293.43 for its claims for damages under the Shortfall Guaranty.

Slip op., p. 3.

Although defendant did not oppose plaintiff’s request for attorneys’ fees, the Court reduced the fees by 40% (from $300,670.50 to $180,402.12) because the attorney invoices “indicate numerous instances of block billing . . . and plaintiff provides CVs for only three of its attorneys who billed in these invoices, and omitted billing rates and bios for the numerous other attorneys, paralegals, and other support staff that appear in the invoices.” Slip op., p. 5. It also awarded $8,068.94 for enforcement costs. Id.

Contact the Commercial Division Blog Committee at commercialdivisionblog@schlamstone.com if you or a client have questions concerning inquests, loan agreements or attorneys’ fees.