Zioness Movement, Inc. v. The Lawfare Project, Inc.

S.D. New York

Zioness Movement, Inc. v. The Lawfare Project, Inc.

DecidedMarch 17, 2022

Docket1:21-cv-07429

StatusUnknown

This text of Zioness Movement, Inc. v. The Lawfare Project, Inc. (Zioness Movement, Inc. v. The Lawfare Project, Inc.) 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

Zioness Movement, Inc. v. The Lawfare Project, Inc., (S.D.N.Y. 2022).

Pincite

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK pen te eee eee ener eenenen X

ZIONESS MOVEMENT, INC., POST-ARGUMENT ORDER Plaintift : 21 Civ, 7429 (AKH) -against- :

THE LAWFARE PROJECT, INC., Defendant. tinue ne neem none eneme cena ceemeeeeenemnnnnneee X ALVIN K, HELLERSTEIN, U.S.DJ.: On Mach 17, 2022 I held oral argument for Defendant’s motion to compel arbitration (ECF No. 17). For the reasons stated on the record and set forth below, I denied the motion. Plaintiff never made or signed any agreement to arbitrate with Defendant and cannot be bound to arbitrate this dispute absent consent. See Hines v. Overstock, 380 Fed. App’x 22, 24-25 (2d Cir. 2010). Defendant’s veil piercing theory is insufficient to compel arbitration. See Boroditskiy v. European Specialities LLC, 314 F.Supp.3d 487, 494 (S.D.N.Y, 2018) (citing Am. Fuel Corp. v. Utah Energy Dey. Co,, 122. F.3d 130, 134 (2d Cir. 1997)), Likewise, Defendant’s direct benefits estoppel theory is unavailing, as Plaintiff's claim does not depend on Berman’s employment contract and Plaintiff was not a third party beneficiary of that contract. See See Am. Bureau of Shipping v. Tencara Shipyard S.P.A., 170 F.3d 349, 353 (2d Cir, 1999). Defendant is ordered to file its Answer by April 7, 2022. The parties are hereby ordered to appear for a status conference on May 20, 2022, at 10:00 a.m. By May 18, 2022 at

12:00, the parties shall submit jointly their proposed case management plan, for approval at the status conference, The status conference will be held via the call-in number: Call-in Number: 888-363-4749 Access code: 7518680 Finally, no later than May 18, 2022, at 12:00 p.m., the parties shall jointly submit to the court (via the email address HellersteinNYSDChambers@nysd.uscourts.gov) a list of all counsel expected to appear on the record, along with thetr contact information. The Clerk shall terminate ECF No. [7.

SO ORDERED. _ Dated: March 17, 2022 CL? . Ad ihe, ~~ 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 pen te eee eee ener eenenen X

ZIONESS MOVEMENT, INC., POST-ARGUMENT ORDER Plaintift : 21 Civ, 7429 (AKH) -against- :

THE LAWFARE PROJECT, INC., Defendant. tinue ne neem none eneme cena ceemeeeeenemnnnnneee X ALVIN K, HELLERSTEIN, U.S.DJ.: On Mach 17, 2022 I held oral argument for Defendant’s motion to compel arbitration (ECF No. 17). For the reasons stated on the record and set forth below, I denied the motion. Plaintiff never made or signed any agreement to arbitrate with Defendant and cannot be bound to arbitrate this dispute absent consent. See Hines v. Overstock, 380 Fed. App’x 22, 24-25 (2d Cir. 2010). Defendant’s veil piercing theory is insufficient to compel arbitration. See Boroditskiy v. European Specialities LLC, 314 F.Supp.3d 487, 494 (S.D.N.Y, 2018) (citing Am. Fuel Corp. v. Utah Energy Dey. Co,, 122. F.3d 130, 134 (2d Cir. 1997)), Likewise, Defendant’s direct benefits estoppel theory is unavailing, as Plaintiff's claim does not depend on Berman’s employment contract and Plaintiff was not a third party beneficiary of that contract. See See Am. Bureau of Shipping v. Tencara Shipyard S.P.A., 170 F.3d 349, 353 (2d Cir, 1999). Defendant is ordered to file its Answer by April 7, 2022. The parties are hereby ordered to appear for a status conference on May 20, 2022, at 10:00 a.m. By May 18, 2022 at

12:00, the parties shall submit jointly their proposed case management plan, for approval at the status conference, The status conference will be held via the call-in number: Call-in Number: 888-363-4749 Access code: 7518680 Finally, no later than May 18, 2022, at 12:00 p.m., the parties shall jointly submit to the court (via the email address HellersteinNYSDChambers@nysd.uscourts.gov) a list of all counsel expected to appear on the record, along with thetr contact information. The Clerk shall terminate ECF No. [7.

SO ORDERED. _ Dated: March 17, 2022 CL? . Ad ihe, ~~ New York, New York ALVIN K. HELLERSTEIN United States District Judge

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Zioness Movement, Inc. v. The Lawfare Project, Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/zioness-movement-inc-v-the-lawfare-project-inc-nysd-2022.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack