Realty Law Digest
Scott Mollen discusses 'Lincoln St. Mezz II LLC v. One Lincoln Mezz 2,' and 'Liberty Square Realty Corp. v. The Doe Fund Inc.'
January 25, 2022 at 02:04 PM
20 minute read
Scott Mollen, Partner at Herrick, Feinstein LLP
UCC Sale—Court Denies Motion To Enjoin UCC Sale of Member and Equity Interest In an LLC—Objections as to Timing of the Sale During a Holiday Period Rejected—Size and Complexity of the Transaction Meant Potential Purchases Would Be Sophisticated and Well Counseled—Notice of Sale Preceded the Holiday Period—Mezzanine Loan Interest Is Not Interest in Real Property for Purpose of Demonstrating That Property Is Unique and Money Damages Would Not Suffice
A plaintiff sought to enjoin a defendant from moving forward with a UCC sale of a "member and equity interest" in an LLC. The dispute involved an office complex in Boston, Massachusetts, owned by a nonparty LLC through its affiliates. There are four loans on the property. There is a mortgage loan for the amount of $535 million and three "subordinate mezzanine loans."
Although the plaintiff attempted to refinance the loans, it defaulted on the subject loan on November 10, 2021. The following day, the defendant sent a notice pursuant to UCC-Art. 9 for the "sale of collateral, namely the one hundred percent equity interest in defendant corporation pursuant to a Pledge and Security Agreement executed when the defendant purchased the loan" in June 2021. The UCC sale was scheduled for Dec. 20, 2021. A third mezzanine lender also scheduled a UCC foreclosure sale. That sale was scheduled for the next day, Dec. 21, 2021.
The plaintiff tried to establish a likelihood of success on the merits by "demonstrating that defendant failed to satisfied §9-6.27(b) of the (UCC)." That provision requires that disposition of the collateral be made in a "commercially reasonable manner." That means that the disposition is done "in conformity with reasonable commercial practices among dealers in the type of property that was the subject of the disposition."
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All![Unit Owners Sued Board for Failure To Maintain Adequate Fire Insurance: This Week in Scott Mollen’s Realty Law Digest Unit Owners Sued Board for Failure To Maintain Adequate Fire Insurance: This Week in Scott Mollen’s Realty Law Digest](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://images.law.com/newyorklawjournal/contrib/content/uploads/sites/389/2021/07/Scott-Mollen-767x633.jpg)
Unit Owners Sued Board for Failure To Maintain Adequate Fire Insurance: This Week in Scott Mollen’s Realty Law Digest
![Do Tenants Have To Pay if They Want To Stay? Do Tenants Have To Pay if They Want To Stay?](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://k2-prod-alm.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/brightspot/05/e8/bdac7ea54619a69bdfea22a83b55/gary-alexis-767x633.jpg)
![Controlling Costs on Capital Construction Projects Controlling Costs on Capital Construction Projects](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://images.law.com/newyorklawjournal/contrib/content/uploads/sites/389/2023/06/Ken-Block-8x10-767x633.jpg)
![Judgment of Partition and Sale Vacated for Failure To Comply With Heirs Act: This Week in Scott Mollen’s Realty Law Digest Judgment of Partition and Sale Vacated for Failure To Comply With Heirs Act: This Week in Scott Mollen’s Realty Law Digest](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://images.law.com/newyorklawjournal/contrib/content/uploads/sites/389/2021/07/Scott-Mollen-767x633.jpg)
Judgment of Partition and Sale Vacated for Failure To Comply With Heirs Act: This Week in Scott Mollen’s Realty Law Digest
Law Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Thursday Newspaper
- 2Public Notices/Calendars
- 3Judicial Ethics Opinion 24-117
- 4Rejuvenation of a Sharp Employer Non-Compete Tool: Delaware Supreme Court Reinvigorates the Employee Choice Doctrine
- 5Mastering Litigation in New York’s Commercial Division Part V, Leave It to the Experts: Expert Discovery in the New York Commercial Division
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250