BANK LEUMI USA, plf-res, v. GM DIAMONDS, INC. def-ap, GM IDEAL, INC. def

3849-3850. BANK LEUMI USA, plf-res, v. GM DIAMONDS, INC. def-ap, GM IDEAL, INC. def — Weir & Partners LLP, New York (Bonnie R. Golub and Walter Weir, Jr. of the bar of the State of New Jersey, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and the District of Columbia, admitted pro hac vice, of counsel), for ap — Hahn & Hessen LLP, New York (Steven J. Mandelsberg of counsel), for res — Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Jeffrey K. Oing, J.), entered on or about February 9, 2016, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, granted plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on its claims for breach of contract against defendant GM Diamonds, Inc. and to enforce a guaranty against defendant Geula Mesica, unanimously affirmed, with costs. Appeal from so-ordered stipulation, same court and Justice, entered April 12, 2016, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as abandoned.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

3849-3850. BANK LEUMI USA, plf-res, v. GM DIAMONDS, INC. def-ap, GM IDEAL, INC. def — Weir & Partners LLP, New York (Bonnie R. Golub and Walter Weir, Jr. of the bar of the State of New Jersey, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and the District of Columbia, admitted pro hac vice, of counsel), for ap — Hahn & Hessen LLP, New York (Steven J. Mandelsberg of counsel), for res — Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Jeffrey K. Oing, J.), entered on or about February 9, 2016, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, granted plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment on its claims for breach of contract against defendant GM Diamonds, Inc. and to enforce a guaranty against defendant Geula Mesica, unanimously affirmed, with costs. Appeal from so-ordered stipulation, same court and Justice, entered April 12, 2016, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as abandoned.

With respect to appellants’ contention that plaintiff’s disposition of GM Diamonds’ collateral was commercially unreasonable, plaintiff presented prima facie evidence that it disposed of the diamond collateral in a commercially reasonable manner (NY UCC §9-627[b]; Merchants Bank of N.Y. v. Gold Lane Corp., 28 AD3d 266, 268-269 [1st Dept 2006]). Prior to putting the goods up for auction, plaintiff had at least two persons with expertise appraise the value of the diamond security. It then reached out to four potential bidders, three of which submitted bids, and plaintiff accepted the highest bid made, which was reasonably close to the appraised value and also represented the market value at the time of the auction as numerous bidders submitted offers.

BANK LEUMI USA, plf-res, v. GM DIAMONDS, INC. def-ap, GM IDEAL, INC. def

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to New York Law Journal