N450JE LLC plf-res, v. PRIORITY 1 AVIATION, INC. def-ap

9140. N450JE LLC plf-res, v. PRIORITY 1 AVIATION, INC. def-ap — The Tsang Law Firm, P.C., New York (Michael Tsang of counsel), for Priority 1 Aviation, Inc., ap — Callan, Koster, Brady & Brennan LLP, New York (David A. LoRe of counsel), for Insured Aircraft Title Service, Inc., ap — Reed Smith LLP, New York (Gil Feder of counsel), for res — Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Debra A. James, J.), entered July 18, 2012, which, insofar as appealed from as limited by the briefs, granted plaintiffs' motion for reargument and, upon reargument, denied defendants' motions for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, granted plaintiffs' motion to compel defendant Priority 1 Aviation, Inc. to accept their responses to its requests to admit, and denied defendants' applications for attorneys' fees, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

9140. N450JE LLC plf-res, v. PRIORITY 1 AVIATION, INC. def-ap — The Tsang Law Firm, P.C., New York (Michael Tsang of counsel), for Priority 1 Aviation, Inc., ap — Callan, Koster, Brady & Brennan LLP, New York (David A. LoRe of counsel), for Insured Aircraft Title Service, Inc., ap — Reed Smith LLP, New York (Gil Feder of counsel), for res — Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Debra A. James, J.), entered July 18, 2012, which, insofar as appealed from as limited by the briefs, granted plaintiffs’ motion for reargument and, upon reargument, denied defendants’ motions for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, granted plaintiffs’ motion to compel defendant Priority 1 Aviation, Inc. to accept their responses to its requests to admit, and denied defendants’ applications for attorneys’ fees, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Plaintiffs’ motion for reargument should have been denied as to their new contention that nonparty Gulfstream would have sent the list of the airworthiness discrepancies it discovered during its inspection of the subject aircraft to Priority because the contract between Priority and plaintiffs obligated Priority to pay for the inspection (see e.g. Foley v. Roche, 68 AD2d 558, 567-568 [1st Dept 1979]). However, reargument was properly granted as to the court’s misapprehension of §3.1(b) of the contract (see CPLR 2221[d][2]; Foley, 68 AD2d at 567).

N450JE LLC plf-res, v. PRIORITY 1 AVIATION, INC. def-ap

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to New York Law Journal