Bank of New York Not Liable Due to Court's Application of The Imposter Rule

By Gina Ilardi

On July 14, 2010, Justice Bernard J. Fried granted Bank of New York’s motion to dismiss a complaint alleging conversion in connection with the cashing of false checks. See Tripp & Co., Inc., v. The Bank of New York (Delaware) Inc., N/K/A BNY Mellon Trust of Delaware, N.A., and Citibank South Dakota, N.A., Index No. 114110-2009 (Sup. Ct., NY County July 14, 2010). Tripp is a small brokerage firm that retained the check clearing services of non-party Pershing, LLC (“Pershing”). At Tripp’s request, Pershing issued checks payable to Tripp’s customers and drawn on Pershing’s account maintained by Bank of New York. Tripp’s former employee, Michael Axel (“Axel”) misappropriated $624,244.78 through a series of fraudulent checks between June 2002 and December 2007. Axel accomplished the foregoing by requesting checks from Pershing, forging the payees names, and cashing and depositing the checks into his own personal account at Citibank. Citibank accepted for deposit and made payments on the checks, while Bank of New York accepted and cleared the checks. As a result, Tripp filed an action alleging conversion against Bank of New York and Citibank.
 

Continue Reading...

ISDA Agreements Between Banks And Mexican Corporation Are Enforceable Despite Illegality Defense Due To Choice Of Law Clause In Agreements

By Mark McGrath

In four related cases, Merrill Lynch Capital Markets AG and Merrill Lynch Capital Services, Inc. v. Controladora Comercial Mexicana S.A.B. De C.V., Index No. 603214/2008 (Sup. Ct., NY County, March 16, 2010), JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.  v. Controladora Comercial Mexicana S.A.B. De C.V., Index No. 603215/2008 (Sup. Ct., NY County, March 16, 2010), J. Aron & Company v. Controladora Comercial Mexicana S.A.B. De C.V., Index No. 603225/2008 (Sup. Ct., NY County, March 16, 2010), and Barclays Bank PLC v. Controladora Comercial Mexicana S.A.B. De C.V., Index No. 603233/2008 (Sup. Ct., NY County, March 16, 2010), Justice Eileen Bransten recently granted summary judgment on liability to the plaintiffs against Controladora Comercial Mexicana S.A.B. De C.V. (“CCM”), one of Mexico’s largest retailers and the operator of approximately 200 stores and 70 restaurants. In each of the cases, the plaintiff asserted breach of contract claims and CCM asserted the same affirmative defenses and counterclaims, which defenses were found to fail by Justice Bransten. Of particular interest was the court’s rejection of CCM’s defense that the agreements were illegal under Mexican law and, thus, could not be enforced.
 

Continue Reading...

Failure To Specify Attorney's Role In Internal Investigation Could Cost You The Attorney-Client and Attorney Work-Product Privileges

By Sarah Aberg

Recently, in HSBC Guyerzeller Bank AG v. Chascona N.V. et al., Index No. 114705/2003 (Sup. Ct., NY County, June 23, 2010) (“Guyerzeller”), Justice Bernard J. Fried held that the attorney-client and attorney work product privileges did not shield from discovery documents created and maintained by an attorney acting as an investigator.
 

Continue Reading...

Motion to Dismiss Based Upon Forum Non Conveniens Denied, Despite Presence Of Foreign Defendants And Application Of Foreign Laws

By Eric O’Connor

On June 25, 2010, Justice Shirley Werner Kornreich of the Commercial Division issued a Decision and Order, inter alia, denying several foreign defendants’ motion to dismiss based upon forum non conveniens. See Coventry Real Estate Advisors, LLC, et al., v. Developers Diversified Realty Corp., et al., Index No. 115559/09 (Sup. Ct. NY Co., June 25, 2010) (“Coventry”).
 

Continue Reading...

Trustee's Establishment of Litigation Reserve Deemed Reasonable Under The "Prudent Man" Standard

By Sarah Aberg

In Bluebird Partners, L.P. v. Bank of New York, Index No. 1996-601016, 2010 NY Slip Op 31407(U) (Sup Ct, NY County, June 7, 2010), Justice Eileen Bransten of the New York Commercial Division, granted a summary judgment motion in favor of the Bank of New York, as a collateral trustee, because she found that the bank acted in a reasonable and prudent manner in establishing and administering a litigation reserve pursuant to an indenture and trust agreement.
 

Continue Reading...

Fraud Claim Against Syndicated Lender Allowed To Proceed, Despite Express Disclaimer Of Reliance In Deal Documents

By Daniel L. Brown and Valentina Shenderovich

On May 10, 2010, Justice Barbara R. Kapnick permitted a fraud claim to proceed against a syndicated lender despite the fact that the plaintiffs were sophisticated parties and the loan documents contained express disclaimers of reliance. See Harbinger Capital Partners Master Fund I Ltd. v. Wachovia Capital Markets LLC, Index No. 602529/08 (Sup Ct, NY County, May 10, 2010) ("Harbinger"). The court held that it was too early in the litigation to determine whether "the true nature of the situation" might place plaintiffs within an exception to the bar on fraud claims that generally occurs where deal documents contain express contractual disclaimers.
 

Continue Reading...

Providing Your Adversary With Information "For Settlement Purposes Only" Does Not Necessarily Make It So

By Daniel L. Brown and David A. Schrager

In Hudson Ins. Co. v. M.J. Oppenheim, 604411/05 (Sup Ct, NY County, May 25, 2010) ("Hudson"), Justice Bransten held that statements made in an expert consultant's report prepared in connection with settlement negotiations were not entitled to the usual protections afforded settlement communications and, therefore, were admissible at trial. The lesson to be learned is that attorneys and clients must be careful when disclosing information during settlement discussions, because otherwise admissible evidence is not rendered inadmissible merely because it was provided during settlement negotiations.
 

Continue Reading...

Worldwide Economic And Credit Crisis Does Not Provide A Basis To Force A Renegotiation Of Loan Documents

By Eric O’Connor

In a recent case in the Commercial Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Justice Bransten granted the lender’s motion for a $50 million summary judgment in lieu of complaint pursuant to CPLR §3213 based upon promissory notes and a guaranty, because borrowers failed to carry their burden to establish any viable defense. See KBS Preferred Holding I LLC v. Petra Fund REIT Corp., Index No. 601836/09 (Sup Ct, NY County, May 3, 2010) (“KBS”)."
 

Continue Reading...

Electronic Filing Is Now Mandatory When Commencing An Action In The Commercial Division

By Sean J. Kirby

On May 24, 2010, the Commercial Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, New York County instituted mandatory electronic filing for actions filed in the Commercial Division. As a result, this rule change most Commercial Division matters must now be commenced, and all subsequent filings must be filed, through the court's electronic case filing website located at www.nycourts.gov/efile (the "NYSECF website").
 

Continue Reading...

Failure to Identify Full Value of Goods Fatal to Damages Claim

By Lisa Lewis

On April 21, 2010, Judge Eileen Bransten of the Commercial Division issued a decision granting summary judgment in favor of defendant Brinks Global Services U.S.A. Inc. (“Brinks”) in a breach of contract and negligence action brought by plaintiff Maxine Company, Inc. (“Maxine”). See Maxine Co. Inc. v. Brinks Global Services U.S.A., Inc., Index No. 602233/05, 2010 NY Slip Op. 50821 (Sup Ct, NY County, April 21, 2010). Maxine is a high-end wholesale and retail jeweler that hired Brinks, a security service, to pick-up, transport and deliver 157 items of fine jewelry from New York City to a department store in Virginia. Although the full retail value of the jewelry was alleged by Maxine to be in excess of $6 million, for reasons that are unclear, Maxine declared the value of the jewelry at only $2 million and did not identify the jewelry as fragile. 
 

Continue Reading...