CALIFORNIA CAPITAL EQUITY, LLC, plf-ap, v. IJKG, LLC, def-res, VIVEK GARIPALLI, def

4174. CALIFORNIA CAPITAL EQUITY, LLC, plf-ap, v. IJKG, LLC, def-res, VIVEK GARIPALLI, def — IJKG, LLC, Third-Party plf-res, v. ABRAXIS BIOSCIENCE, LLC, Third-Party def-ap, PATRICK SOON-SHIONG, Third-Party def — Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP, New York (Deborah K. Brown of counsel), for ap — K&L Gates LLP, New York (Anthony P. La Rocco of counsel), for res — Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Charles E. Ramos, J.), entered February 5, 2016, which, to the extent appealed from, denied plaintiff's motion to dismiss defendant IJKG, LLC's counterclaims for tortious interference with contract and unjust enrichment, and denied third-party defendant Abraxis Bioscience, LLC's motion to dismiss the third-party complaint as against it, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

4174. CALIFORNIA CAPITAL EQUITY, LLC, plf-ap, v. IJKG, LLC, def-res, VIVEK GARIPALLI, def — IJKG, LLC, Third-Party plf-res, v. ABRAXIS BIOSCIENCE, LLC, Third-Party def-ap, PATRICK SOON-SHIONG, Third-Party def — Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP, New York (Deborah K. Brown of counsel), for ap — K&L Gates LLP, New York (Anthony P. La Rocco of counsel), for res — Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Charles E. Ramos, J.), entered February 5, 2016, which, to the extent appealed from, denied plaintiff’s motion to dismiss defendant IJKG, LLC’s counterclaims for tortious interference with contract and unjust enrichment, and denied third-party defendant Abraxis Bioscience, LLC’s motion to dismiss the third-party complaint as against it, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The doctrine of equitable recoupment, as codified in CPLR 203(d), applies to IJKG’s counterclaim for tortious interference with its contractual right of first offer, which otherwise would be barred under the applicable three-year statute of limitations (CPLR 214[4]). The doctrine permits a defendant to seek equitable recoupment in an otherwise untimely defense or counterclaim, if it arises from the transactions, occurrences, or series of transactions or occurrences alleged in the complaint (see Bloomfield v. Bloomfield, 97 NY2d 188, 192-193 [2001]). The counterclaims or defenses must arise from or relate to the “same” transactions or series of transactions (Haller v. 360 Riverside Owners Corp., 273 AD2d 52 [1st Dept 2000]), and some courts have even required a “tight nexus” between the claim and counterclaim (see Greenspan v. Miron, 130 AD3d 1181, 1183 [3d Dept 2015] [internal quotation marks omitted]).

CALIFORNIA CAPITAL EQUITY, LLC, plf-ap, v. IJKG, LLC, def-res, VIVEK GARIPALLI, def

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to New York Law Journal