AirTourist Holdings, LLC v. Citibank, N.A.

S.D. New York

AirTourist Holdings, LLC v. Citibank, N.A.

DecidedMay 26, 2022

Docket1:21-cv-07875

StatusUnknown

This text of AirTourist Holdings, LLC v. Citibank, N.A. (AirTourist Holdings, LLC v. Citibank, N.A.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

AirTourist Holdings, LLC v. Citibank, N.A., (S.D.N.Y. 2022).

Pincite

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK --------------------------------------------------------------- x AIRTOURIST HOLDINGS, LLC, JASON CHEN, : and EDGAR PARK. : : ORDER : : 21 Civ. 7875 (AKH) Petitioners, : -against- : : : : CITIBANK, N.A., et al., : Respondents. : --------------------------------------------------------------- x

ALVIN K. HELLERSTEIN, U.S.D.J.: On November 30, 2021, Respondent Charles Mobus moved to intervene in this case. ECF No. 21. He did so because at the proceedings on November 17, 2022 I stated that such a motion was necessary. See Conf. Tr., ECF No. 31. Petitioners state that they “do not oppose Mobus’ right to intervene as a matter of law” and only oppose “challenge to Petitioners’ application for attorneys’ fees.” Op. Br., ECF No. 27, at 5. Because the motion is unopposed and Mobus satisfies the requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 24(a)(2), the motion to intervene is granted. See D’Amato v. Deutsche Bank, 236 F.3d 78, 84 (2d Cir. 2001). The Clerk shall terminate ECF No. 21.

SO ORDERED. Dated: May 26, 2022 __/s/ Alvin K. Hellerstein____ New York, New York ALVIN K. HELLERSTEIN United States District Judge

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK --------------------------------------------------------------- x AIRTOURIST HOLDINGS, LLC, JASON CHEN, : and EDGAR PARK. : : ORDER : : 21 Civ. 7875 (AKH) Petitioners, : -against- : : : : CITIBANK, N.A., et al., : Respondents. : --------------------------------------------------------------- x

ALVIN K. HELLERSTEIN, U.S.D.J.: On November 30, 2021, Respondent Charles Mobus moved to intervene in this case. ECF No. 21. He did so because at the proceedings on November 17, 2022 I stated that such a motion was necessary. See Conf. Tr., ECF No. 31. Petitioners state that they “do not oppose Mobus’ right to intervene as a matter of law” and only oppose “challenge to Petitioners’ application for attorneys’ fees.” Op. Br., ECF No. 27, at 5. Because the motion is unopposed and Mobus satisfies the requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 24(a)(2), the motion to intervene is granted. See D’Amato v. Deutsche Bank, 236 F.3d 78, 84 (2d Cir. 2001). The Clerk shall terminate ECF No. 21.

SO ORDERED. Dated: May 26, 2022 __/s/ Alvin K. Hellerstein____ New York, New York ALVIN K. HELLERSTEIN United States District Judge

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

AirTourist Holdings, LLC v. Citibank, N.A., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/airtourist-holdings-llc-v-citibank-na-nysd-2022.