Universitas Education, LLC v. Nova Group, Inc.

S.D. New York

Universitas Education, LLC v. Nova Group, Inc.

District Court, S.D. New York·Decided March 31, 2020·No. 1:11-cv-01590·Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK -------------------------------------------------------x UNIVERSITAS EDUCATION, LLC, No. 11 CV 1590-LTS-HBP

Plaintiff,

-against-

NOVA GROUP, INC., as trustee, sponsor, and fiduciary of the CHARTER OAK TRUST WELFARE BENEFIT PLAN,

Defendant. -------------------------------------------------------x

ORDER The Court has received and reviewed in their entirety Plaintiff’s March 23, 2020, letter motions requesting entry of judgment against Moonstone Partners, LLC, Benistar Admin Services, Inc. (“BASI”), and Molly Carpenter, (Docket Entry Nos. 658, 659), as well as the March 30, 2020, letter from counsel for those entities opposing entry of judgment (Docket Entry No. 660). Plaintiff’s letter motions request relief that is not enumerated in NYSD Local Civil Rule 7.1(d), which describes applications which may be brought by letter motion. Accordingly, the motions are DENIED without prejudice to formal motion practice in compliance with the relevant federal, local, and individual procedural rules of Court. Any such motion must address the legal basis, if any, for the Court’s exercise of personal jurisdiction over the non-party entities named in the above-referenced letter motions, whether such a motion is the appropriate procedural mechanism by which the Court can enforce its Memorandum Order confirming the arbitration award in this case (Docket Entry No. 40) against non-parties to the underlying litigation, and whether such motion practice is consistent with the limitations of ancillary jurisdiction as described in Peacock v. Thomas, 516 U.S. 349 (1996), and the Court’s order interpreting Peacock and denying Plaintiff’s prior turnover motion in this case. See Docket Entry No. 545. Any such motion must also address the legal and factual basis for the requested judgment amount in light of any recoveries Plaintiff has already obtained. SO ORDERED.

Dated: New York, New York March 31, 2020

/s/ Laura Taylor Swain LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN 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 UNIVERSITAS EDUCATION, LLC, No. 11 CV 1590-LTS-HBP

Plaintiff,

-against-

NOVA GROUP, INC., as trustee, sponsor, and fiduciary of the CHARTER OAK TRUST WELFARE BENEFIT PLAN,

Defendant. -------------------------------------------------------x

ORDER The Court has received and reviewed in their entirety Plaintiff’s March 23, 2020, letter motions requesting entry of judgment against Moonstone Partners, LLC, Benistar Admin Services, Inc. (“BASI”), and Molly Carpenter, (Docket Entry Nos. 658, 659), as well as the March 30, 2020, letter from counsel for those entities opposing entry of judgment (Docket Entry No. 660). Plaintiff’s letter motions request relief that is not enumerated in NYSD Local Civil Rule 7.1(d), which describes applications which may be brought by letter motion. Accordingly, the motions are DENIED without prejudice to formal motion practice in compliance with the relevant federal, local, and individual procedural rules of Court. Any such motion must address the legal basis, if any, for the Court’s exercise of personal jurisdiction over the non-party entities named in the above-referenced letter motions, whether such a motion is the appropriate procedural mechanism by which the Court can enforce its Memorandum Order confirming the arbitration award in this case (Docket Entry No. 40) against non-parties to the underlying litigation, and whether such motion practice is consistent with the limitations of ancillary jurisdiction as described in Peacock v. Thomas, 516 U.S. 349 (1996), and the Court’s order interpreting Peacock and denying Plaintiff’s prior turnover motion in this case. See Docket Entry No. 545. Any such motion must also address the legal and factual basis for the requested judgment amount in light of any recoveries Plaintiff has already obtained. SO ORDERED.

Dated: New York, New York March 31, 2020

/s/ Laura Taylor Swain LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN United States District Judge

Universitas Education, LLC v. Nova Group, Inc., (S.D.N.Y. 2020).

Pincite

Universitas Education, LLC v. Nova Group, Inc. (Universitas Education, LLC v. Nova Group, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related