- Posted: April 17, 2024 / Commercial Division Blog
Defendants’ Fears That Rival May Use Information To Tortiously Interfere With Business Opportunities Does Not Warrant Attorneys’ Eyes Only Designation
On March 5, 2024, Justice Andrew Borrok granted a motion to compel discovery and declassify certain information marked by the Defendants as “Attorneys’ Eyes Only.” The court in Richmond Global Compass Fund Management GP, LLC, et al. v. Decio Nascimento, et al., Index No. 654190/2021, concluded that Defendants could not limit the provision of certain information solely to the Plaintiff’s attorney even if Defendants feared that the Plaintiff would use that information to tortiously interfere with Defendants’ current and prospective business relations. The Court explained, in part: Read More
- Posted: April 15, 2024 / Commercial Division Blog
Court Denies Motion To Amend Complaint To Add New Claims After Dismissal Of Original Claims On Appeal
On March 11, 2024, Justice Andrew Borrok denied a plaintiff’s motion to amend his complaint to add new theories of liability after the Appellate Division dismissed his original claims. The decision in Finkelstein v. U.S. Bank, National Associate, As Trustee, Index No. 650849/2021, flagged a number of problems with the plaintiff’s proposed amended complaint, including that the claims were untimely and did not relate back to the original complaint. But the Court also noted that the Plaintiff had not shown a reasonable excuse for his delay in moving to amend to add the new claims, rejecting his argument that dismissal on appeal had altered the law in a way that justified amendment. The Court explained: Read More
- Posted: April 12, 2024 / Commercial Division Blog
Court Grants Civil Contempt for Failure to Cooperate with Court-Appointed Receiver
On March 11, 2024, Justice Andrea Masley of the New York County Commercial Division, issued a decision in Bernstein-Deitcher v Gurwitz, 2024 NY Slip Op 30819(U), granting the motion by the Court-appointed receiver to hold the Defendant in civil contempt for lack of compliance with the Court’s prior order requiring the turnover and sale of certain shares of stock to satisfy an unpaid judgment. The Court held that contempt was appropriate despite Defendants’ compliance with certain aspects of that order after the receiver had moved for contempt. The Court explained: Read More
- Posted: April 10, 2024 / Commercial Division Blog
Court Dismisses Complaint Based on Statute of Frauds
On March 7, 2024, Justice Andrew Borrok of the New York County Commercial Division issued a decision in UNO A Brokerage Inc v. Inshur, Inc., 2024 NY Slip Op 30733(U), granting Defendant’s motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s claims, including Plaintiff’s claim for breach of contract based on a provision of New York’s statute of frauds, General Obligations Law § 5-701(a)(10). The Court explained in relevant part: Read More
- Posted: April 8, 2024 / Commercial Division Blog
Court Grants Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction
On March 6, 2024, Justice Joel M. Cohen of the New York County Commercial Division issued a decision in Dembicki v. Synergy Health Network, Inc., 2024 NY Slip Op 30704(U), granting Defendants’ motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. The Court held that the parties’ agreement to New York law, and to an arbitration clause requiring arbitration of the parties’ claims in New York, was insufficient to create personal jurisdiction over Defendants, who otherwise had no connection to New York. The Court explained: Read More
Load More
