Van Z. Krikorian Exposed: Fraud in Armenia and USA
Important Notice This page presents the public court record as filed in the Superior Court of New Jersey. All allegations are drawn directly from court documents. The underlying merits are subject to arbitration proceedings before the American Arbitration Association (AAA). No final adjudication of liability has been entered.

Notwithstanding the pending arbitration, the Superior Court of New Jersey has entered a signed Preliminary Injunction Order against Defendant Van Z. Krikorian, finding a reasonable likelihood of success on the merits and a demonstrated need for court-ordered relief. This Order was signed by the Honorable Nicholas Ostuni, Sr., J.S.C. on March 5, 2026 and remains in full force and effect.

→ Read the full signed Order Granting Preliminary Injunction — March 5, 2026 (PDF) Superior Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division, Bergen County  |  Docket No. BER-C-000287-25  |  Trans ID: CHC202674129
Parties
Plaintiffs

Saro Hartounian, Nareg Hartounian & Hyegate, LLC

Majority members (each holding a 1/3 interest) and co-founders of Hyegate, LLC, a New York LLC that owns Aragats Perlite OJSC (AP), an Armenian mining company, through subsidiary DAP LLC. Saro and Nareg provided all capital investment — approximately $3.3 million — for the venture. Represented by Chiesa Shahinian & Giantomasi PC.

v.
Defendant

Van Z. Krikorian

A 1/3 member of Hyegate, LLC. A long-time attorney and associate of Saro and Nareg, formerly serving as general counsel to their business Harco Industries. Contributed zero capital to the venture; his role was to provide legal counsel and manage mining/legal operations in Armenia. Represented by Fox Rothschild LLP.

Key Case Statistics
$3.3M
Capital invested by Plaintiffs
$0
Capital contributed by Krikorian
7
Causes of action alleged
1/3
Krikorian's ownership share
Background — What This Case Is About

According to the Verified Complaint filed December 9, 2025, in 2017 Krikorian persuaded Saro Hartounian to invest in Aragats Perlite OJSC (AP), an Armenian perlite mining company. Saro and his son Nareg provided all of the investment capital — initially $825,000, growing over time to approximately $3.3 million. Krikorian contributed no capital; his role was to provide legal expertise and manage the legal and operational affairs of AP in Armenia through Hyegate and its subsidiary DAP LLC.

In fall 2025, Saro declined to invest further capital. Plaintiffs allege that Krikorian then attempted to seize full control of Hyegate and AP for himself on unfair terms, demanded assent within one day, and when refused, launched a campaign of conduct that the Plaintiffs allege caused serious harm to the business and to them personally.

On March 5, 2026, the Court entered a signed Preliminary Injunction Order — including a contested Paragraph D governing the arbitral tribunal's authority — after rejecting Defendant's proposed language. The Judge's handwritten annotation on the signed order states: "This Court finds the above language is consistent with this Court's stated order on the record and reflective of what this Court has indeed ordered."

→ View the signed Order Granting Preliminary Injunction (PDF) (Docket: BER-C-000287-25  |  Trans ID: CHC202674129  |  March 5, 2026)

Allegations Made by Plaintiffs in Court Documents

The following are allegations contained in the Verified Complaint and court filings. They have not been finally adjudicated.

Count Claim Summary of Allegations
I Breach of Fiduciary Duty Krikorian allegedly violated his duties as a Manager and Member of Hyegate by acting unilaterally against the company's interests and those of the majority members.
II Breach of Contract Alleged breaches of the Amended and Restated LLC Operating Agreement of Hyegate, including acting without majority authorization.
III Defamation Plaintiffs allege Krikorian circulated false statements within the Armenian community — including that Saro was financially desperate and that Nareg was involved in "illegal" and "criminal" matters — which were untrue and damaging.
IV Business Defamation (Hyegate) Alleged false statements to AP's primary customer and distributor, including accusing AP of contract violations, which invited potential litigation against the company.
V Fraud / Conspiracy to Commit Fraud Alleged fraudulent misrepresentations made to Saro in connection with Krikorian's role in the venture and his attempted takeover of Hyegate.
VI Declaratory Judgment Plaintiffs seek a declaration of the parties' rights and obligations under the Operating Agreement and governing documents.
VII Dissociation Plaintiffs seek Krikorian's dissociation from Hyegate, LLC based on his alleged conduct.
Specific Conduct Alleged in Court Documents

Complaint to Armenian Authorities

Plaintiffs allege that on or about November 17, 2025, Krikorian filed a complaint with Armenian government authorities claiming AP was out of compliance with Armenian labor laws — matters that allegedly fell within the scope of his own duties as legal manager of AP.

Confidential Information Disclosed

Plaintiffs allege that on November 28, 2025, Krikorian sent sensitive, confidential business information of AP directly to the company's primary customer — in alleged violation of his fiduciary duties and the Operating Agreement.

Threatened Bankruptcy

Plaintiffs allege Krikorian threatened AP with bankruptcy and invited Armenian government inspectors to investigate the company for "illegal" activity when Saro refused his buyout demands.

Defamatory Statements

Plaintiffs allege Krikorian spread false rumors in the close-knit Armenian community that Saro was offering his shares because of financial desperation, and that Nareg was involved in criminality.

Ignored Company Resolutions

Plaintiffs allege Krikorian refused to attend a November 20, 2025 Special Meeting of Hyegate's Managers, at which Resolutions were passed affirming he had no authority to act unilaterally — and then ignored those Resolutions.

Attempted Takeover

Plaintiffs allege Krikorian presented Saro with terms demanding immediate transfer of all of Saro and Nareg's interest in Hyegate to Krikorian, giving him one day to decide, despite contributing no capital to the venture.

What the Court Has Ordered
Court Finding — February 4, 2026 Hearing The Honorable Nicholas Ostuni, J.S.C. stated on the record: "I do find that there is a reasonable likelihood of success on the merits of this case. I believe that there is a need for this injunctive relief." (Transcript, Colloquy 83:18–21)
Preliminary Injunction — Entered March 5, 2026

Judge Ostuni granted a Preliminary Injunction enjoining Defendant Van Z. Krikorian from:

  • Taking any unilateral action on behalf of Hyegate, LLC and/or its subsidiaries DAP LLC and Aragats Perlite OJSC during the pendency of litigation;
  • Publicizing or disseminating to third parties any confidential information of Hyegate and/or its subsidiaries;
  • Taking any action adverse to the business interests of Hyegate and/or its subsidiaries;
  • Taking any action that would violate the Amended and Restated LLC Operating Agreement of Hyegate or the governing documents of any subsidiaries.
Motion to Compel Arbitration — Granted January 20, 2026 The Court granted Defendant's motion to compel arbitration (except as to attorneys' fees). The matter is stayed pending arbitration before the New York City branch of the American Arbitration Association (AAA). Plaintiffs were ordered to initiate arbitration within 20 calendar days of receipt of the Preliminary Injunction Order.
Arbitral Tribunal Authority — Court's Ruling on Record The Court ruled on the record that once empaneled, the arbitral tribunal has the power — upon application by Defendant — to review the preliminary injunctive relief. The signed March 5, 2026 Order includes Plaintiffs' proposed paragraph D language, with the Court's handwritten note: "This Court has considered defendant's March 4, 2026 correspondence, specifically his proposed language for paragraph D... This Court finds the above language is consistent with this Court's stated order on the record and reflective of what this Court has indeed ordered."
Case Timeline
November 2025
Alleged conduct escalates
Plaintiffs allege Krikorian filed complaint with Armenian authorities (Nov 17), Hyegate held a Special Meeting at which Krikorian refused to appear (Nov 20), and Krikorian sent confidential AP information to AP's primary customer (Nov 28).
December 9, 2025
Verified Complaint filed
Plaintiffs filed a Verified Complaint in Bergen County Superior Court, Chancery Division, along with an application for a preliminary injunction with temporary restraints.
December 22, 2025
Defendant's motion to compel arbitration filed
Krikorian, through Fox Rothschild LLP, filed a motion to stay the action and compel arbitration under Section 10.14 of Hyegate's Operating Agreement and the Federal Arbitration Act. View filing →
December 23, 2025
Case Management Order entered
Judge Ostuni entered a Case Management Order scheduling both Orders to Show Cause for hearing on January 9, 2026 at 10:00 a.m., with opposition due January 2, 2026 and reply papers due January 7, 2026. View order →
January 2, 2026
Plaintiffs file opposition; note Defendant's TRO deadline missed
Plaintiffs filed their opposition to Defendant's motion to compel arbitration and stay. Separately, counsel for Plaintiffs notified the Court that Defendant had not filed any opposition to Plaintiffs' TRO application by the 5:00 p.m. deadline, requesting it be deemed unopposed. View opposition brief →   View letter re: unopposed TRO →
January 9, 2026
Hearing held; TRO arguments heard
The Court heard arguments from both parties on the TRO application and Defendant's motion to compel arbitration. Defendant Van Z. Krikorian gave a brief statement under oath. Krikorian's reply brief was filed prior to this hearing. View Defendant's reply brief →
January 20, 2026
Temporary Restraining Order entered; Arbitration compelled
Judge Ostuni entered a TRO restraining Krikorian from taking unilateral action, disclosing confidential information, or acting against Hyegate's business interests. The Court also granted the motion to compel arbitration and stayed the action pending arbitration. View signed order →
February 4–5, 2026
Preliminary injunction hearing
The Court conducted a full hearing on Plaintiffs' application for preliminary injunctive relief. Judge Ostuni ruled on the record, finding a reasonable likelihood of success on the merits and need for injunctive relief. He also ruled that the arbitral tribunal would have the power to revisit the injunction upon application.
March 4, 2026
Competing proposed orders submitted
Both parties submitted simultaneous letters and competing proposed language for Section D of the Order, addressing whether the arbitral tribunal would be expressly empowered to modify or remove the injunction. View Defendant's letter →   View Plaintiffs' letter →
March 5, 2026
Preliminary Injunction Order signed
Judge Ostuni signed the Preliminary Injunction Order, adopting Plaintiffs' proposed paragraph D language and rejecting Defendant's proposed language. The Court's handwritten annotation confirmed the signed order was consistent with its stated ruling on the record.
Public Court Documents Filed in This Matter

All filings are available through the New Jersey eCourts public portal. Docket: BER-C-000287-25.

Current Status

As of March 28, 2026:

  • Preliminary Injunction is in effect — Krikorian is restrained from acting unilaterally on behalf of Hyegate or its subsidiaries, disclosing confidential information, or taking actions adverse to the business.
  • Court action is stayed — The Superior Court matter is stayed pending completion of AAA arbitration in New York City.
  • Arbitration to be filed — Plaintiffs were required to initiate AAA arbitration within 20 calendar days of the March 5, 2026 Order.
This page presents the public court record of Hartounian et al. v. Van Z. Krikorian, Docket No. BER-C-000287-25.
Superior Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division, Bergen County. Presiding: Hon. Nicholas Ostuni, Sr., J.S.C.
All allegations are drawn from publicly filed court documents. No final judgment has been entered. Merits are pending arbitration.