Millennium BCPBank, N.A. v. Kal-Pak Realty, LLC

 on November 4th, 2012

The principal of mortgagor Kal-Pak forged his deceased father’s signature on the deed conveying title to Kal-Pak and thereby defrauded his siblings’ fee interests in the premises. Prior to commencement of the foreclosure, the principal of Kal-Pak assigned his interest in mortgagor Kal-Pak to the defrauded siblings in settlement of the siblings’ claims against him, and he agreed to continue  to make mortgage payments to lender bank. Following default on the note and commencement of the foreclosure, the mortgagor claimed it did not have valid title. Mortgagor moved for summary judgment declaring the deed void ab initio and dismissing the foreclosure. The court held that even if the deed were invalid, it was capable of being ratified by the mortgagor. Fact issues were presented whether the siblings’ acceptance of the assignment of ownership in mortgagor Kal-Pak with knowledge of the fraud was a ratification of the fraudulent acts.

Download PDF Millennium BCPBank, N.A. v. Kal-Pak Realty, LLC

Tradewinds Airlines, Inc. v. Soros

 on September 23rd, 2012

Judgment creditor brought action to pierce the corporate veil of defendant corporations under Delaware law on an alter-ego theory and to enforce default judgment against individual defendants.  In order to pierce the corporate veil on an alter-ego theory plaintiff must show the corporation and its controlling principals operated as a single economic entity and that overall unfairness, injustice or fraud is present. Construing the complaint in favor of plaintiff, the defendants’ motion to dismiss for failure to plead a cause of action was denied.

Download PDF Tradewinds Airlines, Inc. v. Soros

Lenox Hill Hospital v. American International Group

 on September 23rd, 2012

Action for a preliminary injunction by hospital against its excess insurance carrier American International Group to restrain AIG and payor bank from drawing upon or honoring a letter of credit purchased by hospital to secure payment of insurance premiums. The only basis for the purchaser of a letter of credit to defeat payment on the letter of credit is to demonstrate fraud in procuring the letter of credit or in the payment thereon. Plaintiff failed to demonstrate a probability of success on the merits of its fraud claim and the action was dismissed.

Download PDF Lenox Hill Hospital v. American International Group