Clean Air Car Service & Parking Corp. v. Clean Air Car Service & Parking Branch Two, LLC

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ------------------------------------------------x CLEAN AIR CAR SERVICE & PARKING CORP., MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Plaintiffs, Case No. 1:23-cv-06461 (FB) (MMH)

-against-

CLEAN AIR CAR SERVICE & PARKING BRANCH TWO, LLC, IV - CVCF NEB REO, LLC, and LAZ PARKING, LTD, LLC,

Defendants. ------------------------------------------------x Appearances: For the Plaintiff: For the Defendant Clean Air Two: KEVIN S. WANG JAY S. HELLMAN Wood Wang & Associates, PLLC THOMAS A. DRAGHI 30-50 Whitestone Expy, Ste 402 Westerman Ball Ederer Miller Zucker Flushing, NY 11354 & Sharfstein, LLP 1201 RXR Plaza Uniondale, NY 11556

For the Defendant IV-CVCF NEB REO, LLC: PAUL S. SAMSON Riemer & Braunstein LLP 100 Cambridge Street, 22nd Floor Boston, MA 02114

For the Defendant LAZ Parking Ltd., LLC: JARED M. MOGIL Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani LLP One Battery Park Plaza, 28th Floor New York, NY 10004 BLOCK, Senior District Judge: Before the Court is Clean Air Car Service & Parking Branch Two, LLC (‘the Clean Air 2 Debtor”) and IV - CVCF NEB REO, LLC’s (together, “Defendants”) motion to refer this case to the bankruptcy proceeding pending before Judge Nancy

Lord in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of New York, initiated by the Clean Air Two Debtor’s Chapter 11 petition: In re: Clean Air Car Service & Parking Branch Two, LLC, Case No. 23-41937 (NHL) (Bankr. E.D.N.Y.

2023). In opposition, Plaintiff has cross-moved to remand back to state court.1 * * * This case arises from Plaintiffs’ allegations that the Clean Air 2 Debtor breached a lease agreement it had with Plaintiffs and tortiously interfered with

their business relations. Plaintiffs have filed a proof of claim in the Clean Air 2 Debtor’s bankruptcy proceeding based on the same allegations, as evidenced by their attachment of their summary judgment motion from this case to their proof of

claim form. Accordingly, the Court finds that this case is a “core” proceeding within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 157 and refers it to the ongoing bankruptcy proceeding on that basis. See In re S.G. Phillips Constructors, Inc., 45 F.3d 702,

1 The Clean Air Two Debtor removed this case from the supreme court of New York, Queens County, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1334(b), 1441(a).

2 706 (2d Cir. 1995) (recognizing “core” proceeding where “creditor became involved in bankruptcy court proceedings by filing its proof of claim in bankruptcy

court and thereafter actively litigating in that court”); see also 1325 Atl. Realty LLC v. Brooklyn Hosp. Grp. LLC, No. 22-CV-1047 (RPK) (VMS), 2023 WL 2599660, at *3-5 (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 22, 2023) (referring “core” case to bankruptcy

court in connection with pending proceeding). Plaintiffs’ arguments to the contrary are without merit. Mandatory abstention is unwarranted because this case concerns a “core” proceeding. See In re Petrie Retail, Inc., 304 F.3d 223, 232 (2d Cir. 2002) (“Abstention is only

mandated with respect to non-core matters.”). And the Court declines to apply the permissive abstention doctrine or exercise its discretion to remand this case back to state court. See Osuji v. HSBC Bank, U.S.A., N.A., 580 B.R. 605, 612 (E.D.N.Y.

2018) (listing factors for permissive abstention) Worldview Ent. Holdings, Inc. v. Woodrow, 611 B.R. 10, 20 (S.D.N.Y. 2019) (inquires for permissive abstention and equitable remand “are essentially the same and are often analyzed together”). It is obvious that the bankruptcy court is best suited to accomplish the efficient

administration of all claims involving the debtor’s estate, particularly those already registered against the debtor.

3 CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, Defendants’ motion to refer this case to the

Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of New York is GRANTED. Plaintiff’s cross-motion to remand this action to state court is DENIED. This action is hereby referred to the Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of New York pursuant to

28 U.S.C. § 157(a) and this Court’s Standing Orders of Reference dated August 28, 1986, and December 5, 2012. SO ORDERED.

_/S/ Frederic Block_________ FREDERIC BLOCK Senior United States District Judge Brooklyn, New York June 24, 2024