Thompson & Skrabanek's Many Recent Victories

Thompson & Skrabanek has been busy! So busy that we've neglected to share many significant victories from 2025 and 2026.

A brief summary of some of our more noteworthy recent wins follows:

AUGUST 2025: Angela Wahab v. Evolutions Hair Salon, LLC (Southern District of New York, Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr.) - Partner J.R. Skrabanek and Associate Mastewal Terefe prevailed on a motion to dismiss. Thompson & Skrabanek secured a dismissal in federal court for Evolutions Hair Salon, LLC in a website accessibility class action brought under the Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act and New York City law. The court granted the defendant’s motion to dismiss after finding that the plaintiff did not adequately show legal standing to sue. The court explained that the complaint relied on broad, boilerplate allegations and did not clearly describe how the plaintiff personally encountered barriers on the website. The court also found the plaintiff’s claimed intent to return to the website was not sufficiently supported. Because standing was missing, the court declined to reach the defendant’s other arguments and dismissed the related NYCHRL and declaratory-relief claims as well. The decision is available here:

12 - Order Granting Def's Motion to Dismiss (Curl).pdf

Download PDF • 301KB

SEPTEMBER 2025: Highland Hill Capital v. Make 3 Cents, LLC (Kings Co. Supreme Court) - Partner J.R. Skrabanek and Associate James To prevailed on a motion to dismiss. Thompson & Skrabanek obtained a complete dismissal for Make 3 Cents, LLC in Kings County Supreme Court (Commercial Division). The plaintiff sued Make 3 Cents after obtaining a judgment against different parties and tried to hold Make 3 Cents responsible under theories including successor liability and fraudulent conveyance. The court found that New York courts lacked personal jurisdiction over the company, an Iowa LLC with no meaningful business presence in New York. The court noted evidence that Make 3 Cents had no New York office, property, bank account, employees, customers, or targeted advertising in New York. The plaintiff’s arguments based on New York long-arm jurisdiction case law were rejected because the facts did not show the kind of New York contacts required. The court also rejected the plaintiff’s successor-liability jurisdiction argument, emphasizing that the asset purchase agreement expressly stated that Make 3 Cents did not assume the seller’s liabilities. The complaint was dismissed in its entirety. The decision is available here:

35 - Decision and Order (Make 3 Cents).pdf

Download PDF • 2.58MB

DECEMBER 2025: Greenland Asset Management Corporation v. Microcloud Hologram, Inc., et al. (Appellate Division, First Department) - Partner J.R. Skrabanek and Associate Mastewal Terefe won an appellate victory for Greenland Asset Management Corporation. The appeals court unanimously affirmed, four justices to zero, the trial court’s decision refusing to dismiss Greenland’s breach of contract and good-faith claims against the defendant. Greenland alleged that the defendant failed to use its required “best efforts” to prepare and file an SEC registration statement after Greenland made written demands under the parties’ agreement. The court held that the contract gave clear enough standards to measure the defendant’s performance, including timing requirements and references to SEC rules. The court also held that Greenland adequately alleged bad faith by claiming the defendant blocked Greenland’s requests so its principal could sell his own shares without competition. In addition, the court rejected the defendant’s argument that it had sole discretion over removing restrictive legends on the shares, noting that the parties’ contract required the defendant to take action so Greenland could sell its stock. As a result, Greenland’s key claims remain in the case and are moving forward. The decision is available here:

14 - Order Affirming Trial Court Ruling (Greenland).pdf

Download PDF • 108KB

DECEMBER 2025: BurgherGray LLP v. Christopher Klug (Southern District of New York, Judge Edgardo Ramos) - Partner J.R. Skrabanek and Associate Mastewal Terefe prevailed on confirmation of a prior arbitration award. Thompson & Skrabanek won a total victory for Christopher Klug in the Southern District of New York by defeating his former firm’s attempt to overturn that same award. The court denied the petition to vacate and granted Klug’s cross-petition to confirm the award. The judge held that the former firm’s challenge was untimely under the Federal Arbitration Act’s strict deadline for seeking vacatur. The court also ruled that, even aside from timing, the firm failed to prove that the arbitration award was obtained by fraud. In particular, the court found that an alleged, unproven email-forwarding issue could have been discovered earlier and was not material to the core arbitration issue, which was unpaid compensation owed to Klug under his agreement. As a result, the arbitration award in Klug’s favor remained fully enforceable. The decision is available here:

18 - Order Confirming Klug Arb Award & Denying Burgher Vacate.pdf

Download PDF • 209KB

JANUARY 2026: Yolanda Management Corporation v. Microalgo, Inc., et al. (Appellate Division, First Department) - Partner J.R. Skrabanek and Associate Mastewal Terefe prevailed on appeal. This is a "sister case" to the Greenland v. Microcloud dispute but with the identical result. The court again unanimously affirmed the trial court’s refusal to dismiss Yolanda’s breach of contract claim against MicroAlgo, Inc. Yolanda alleged that MicroAlgo failed to file an SEC registration statement after receiving a written demand under the parties’ registration rights agreement. The First Department held that the agreement’s “best efforts” language was still enforceable because the contract provided objective standards for what MicroAlgo was required to do and when. As a result, Yolanda’s contract claim remains in the case and can proceed. The decision is available here:

12 - Order Affirming Trial Court (Yolanda).pdf

Download PDF • 104KB

JANUARY 2026: Laurence Wills v. Pilgrim Surf, Inc., et al. (Eastern District of New York, Judge Ann M. Donnelly) - Partner John Thompson and Associate Mastewal Terefe prevailed on a motion to dismiss for Pilgrim Surf, Inc. in another web accessibility case. The plaintiff asserted claims under the ADA and the New York City Human Rights Law based on alleged barriers on Pilgrim Surf’s website. The court granted Pilgrim Surf’s motion to dismiss, finding that the complaint did not allege enough specific facts to show the plaintiff had standing to sue in federal court. In plain terms, the judge found the allegations about past visits, the claimed shopping attempt, and any real intent to return to the website were too vague and boilerplate. The court also declined to keep the remaining state-law claim after dismissing the federal ADA claim. The court denied leave to amend and dismissed the case with prejudice, directing the clerk to enter judgment and close the case. The decision is available here:

15 - Order on Motion to Dismiss (Pilgrim Surf).pdf

Download PDF • 266KB

JANUARY 2026: Gilbert Allan Segal Jr. v. New York Military Academy, et al. (Southern District of New York, Judge Vincent L. Briccetti) - Partner J.R. Skrabanek prevailed on a motion to dismiss. Thompson & Skrabanek secured a dismissal for the individual defendants we represented—Colonel Dennis Costello, Jamie Norris, and Colette Austin—in a federal case arising from alleged physical and sexual abuse at the New York Military Academy ("NYMA"). Several years ago, Plaintiff originally only sued NYMA under New York's Child Victims Act. Later, Plaintiff attempted to amend his complaint to add more additional defendants. The court held that the claims against T&S's individual clients were filed too late and did not qualify for relation-back to the earlier complaints. In particular, the court found the plaintiff’s later effort to add these defendants was not based on an excusable mistake about identity, which is required under the applicable rules. The court also rejected the plaintiff’s request for another amendment, finding that a fifth amended complaint would be futile because it would not fix the timing problem. As a result, all claims against the three individual defendants were dismissed from the case with prejudice. The decision is available here:

194 - Order Granting Individual Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (NYMA).pdf

Download PDF • 196KB

Thompson & Skrabanek delivers high-level litigation representation with a practical focus on results, whether the case involves a business dispute, an employment issue, a fraud claim, or a consumer-facing lawsuit. Our recent victories reflect a consistent approach: identify the strongest legal arguments early, move efficiently, and press for dismissal, enforcement, or affirmance when the facts and law support it. We are a boutique firm, which allows clients to work directly with experienced litigators while avoiding the overhead and cost structure of larger, more expensive firms. That combination helps us provide strong advocacy and strategic judgment at a value level that clients can appreciate. Please contact us if you are seeking representation within New York.