Archive for the ‘Litigation’ Category
Firm Victory for Vandegrift Forwarding Company, Inc.
Reavis Parent Lehrer LLP won a significant victory on behalf of its client Vandegrift Forwarding Company, Inc. (“Vandegrift”) when Judge Dora Irizarry of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York dismissed a complaint asserting claims under the federal Employee Retirement Income Security Act, commonly known as ERISA. A copy of the Decision in Gabelman v. Vandegrift Forward Company, No. 1:11-cv-02718, 2012 WL 1004872 can be accessed here.
At issue in Gabelman was a “Salary Continuation Agreement” between Vandegrift and its employee William Gabelman, under which certain payments over time would be made to Gabelman if he remained continuously employed by the Company through retirement at age sixty-five. Before that date, however, Gabelman was terminated for cause.
Gabelman sued in federal court, asserting that his agreement was an ERISA “plan” subject to the rights, obligations and remedies under ERISA. The firm moved to dismiss on the ground that the agreement was not an ERISA plan, but rather a simple contract subject to state contract law. ERISA is designed to regulate how employee benefit and retirement plans are administered; however, an agreement is governed by ERISA only where it involves a plan that includes an ongoing administrative scheme with significant management discretion. As we demonstrated and Judge Irizarry agreed, in this case an agreement involving a single employee, with payments in a liquidated amounts payable upon the happening of a clearly defined event, did not involve the ongoing administration, discretion and oversight needed to qualify as an ERISA plan.
The Firm’s representation was led by Litigation Partner Larry Brocchini, who, with Litigation Partners Mark Moore and Alice Jump, regularly counsels on and litigates employment matters on behalf of companies and individuals. Because employee benefit and post-employment arrangements may unknowingly fall within ERISA, employers should consult counsel before entering into such agreements. The Firm’s employment group, lead by Senior Partner Helen D. “Heidi” Reavis, regularly counsels employees and employers on compliance and regulatory matters, including ERISA.
Another Firm Victory for Broadway Metro
The Firm won another victory on behalf of our client, Broadway Metro Associates, LP (“Broadway Metro”), the owner of the historic Metro Theater located on upper Broadway in Manhattan, successfully obtaining the dismissal of a complaint brought by a former tenant arising out of Broadway Metro’s refusal to consent to the tenant’s purported sublease. Justice Bransten of the New York State Supreme Court found that the lease required advance consent by the landlord for any sublease, which the tenant had failed to obtain, and that the landlord’s refusal to consent was proper in light of the former tenant’s own defaults under the lease. The Court also found that the former tenant’s claims for tortious interference with contract and tortious interference with business relations, as well as its claims against individuals affiliated with Broadway Metro, failed as a matter of law. Alice K. Jump of the Firm’s litigation group, assisted by Sander Lehrer, briefed the motion and Ms. Jump argued the motion before the Court. The decision can be viewed here: Results.
Firm Victory for China North East Petroleum Holdings Ltd.
The Firm won a significant victory on behalf of China North East Petroleum Holdings Limited (“NEP” or “Company”), obtaining a judgment dismissing three shareholder derivative lawsuits against the Company and its directors and officers pending before Judge Miriam Goldman Cedarbaum in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. NEP is an independent oil company that produces crude oil in Northern China. Plaintiffs, shareholders of NEP, brought suit derivatively on behalf of the Company against its officers and directors, contending that they had breached fiduciary duties owed to NEP concerning accounting errors. On May 27, 2011, the Court granted a motion to dismiss Plaintiffs’ complaint and entered final judgment, finding that the complaint failed to allege facts showing a breach of fiduciary duty under the stringent standards set by Nevada law (where NEP is incorporated). Plaintiffs then moved to alter and amend the judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e). In a well-reasoned eight page opinion, Judge Cedarbaum denied Plaintiffs’ motion. Plaintiffs have now filed a Notice of Appeal to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. Lawrence (“Larry”) Brocchini led the Firm’s representation, on which the Firm served as co-counsel with San Francisco-based Crone Law Group. The decision is Strickland v. Hongjun, Nos. 10 Civ. 5445 (MGC), 10 Civ. 6319 (MGC), 10 Civ. 6344 (MGC), 2001 WL 2671895 (S.D.N.Y. July 8, 2011).