Slow Food USA PTY Ltd. v. New WTC Retail Owner LLC
- Valerie Caproni
- 1:20-cv-00830
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Slow Food USA PTY Ltd. v. New WTC Retail Owner LLC, Judge Caproni denied emergency relief seeking seizure of leased kitchen equipment.
The ruling directly affected SFUSA’s request for immediate possession of the kitchen equipment and New WTC’s opposition to that request. Silver Chef Rentals Pty Ltd. and Slow Food LLC were also involved in the equipment and lease arrangements described by the court.
What happened
Slow Food USA Pty. Ltd., doing business as Market Lane NYC, asked the court in Slow Food USA PTY Ltd. v. New WTC Retail Owner LLC to order the U.S. Marshals Service to seize kitchen equipment from New WTC’s premises. The equipment had been leased from Silver Chef Rentals Pty Ltd. and used by Slow Food LLC, which had left it behind after New WTC evicted it for failing to pay rent.
The court found that Slow Food had not shown that it would suffer harm that could not be repaired later. The equipment was generic and replaceable, Slow Food acknowledged that paying its rental obligations would preserve its relationship with Silver Chef, and New WTC had said it would not remove the equipment. Slow Food also had not shown a likely right to possess the equipment because it did not own it and had not produced Slow Food LLC’s lease with New WTC.
The court denied Slow Food’s motion for emergency relief. Judge Valerie Caproni also directed the parties to take reasonable steps to determine whether New WTC’s membership included a non-U.S. individual or entity, because that information could affect whether the federal court had diversity jurisdiction.
The detailed version
- Slow Food USA PTY Ltd. v. New WTC Retail Owner LLC · No. 1:20-cv-00830
- Valerie Caproni
- Feb. 3, 2020
Background
Slow Food USA Pty. Ltd. (SFUSA), doing business as Market Lane NYC, filed an emergency motion asking the court to direct the U.S. Marshals Service to seize kitchen equipment located on New WTC Retail Owner LLC’s premises. The equipment included refrigerators, shelving, sinks, and other kitchen installations and devices.
SFUSA had leased the equipment from Silver Chef Rentals Pty Ltd., a non-party, and allowed its subsidiary, Slow Food LLC (Slow NY), to use and install it at New WTC’s premises. New WTC evicted Slow NY for failing to pay rent, and Slow NY left the equipment there. New WTC refused to return the equipment to SFUSA while the parties disputed who had the right to possess it. SFUSA said it wanted possession so it could return the equipment to Silver Chef.
Emergency-relief standard
The court applied the standard for a temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction, which requires a showing of irreparable harm; either a likelihood of success on the merits or sufficiently serious questions for litigation combined with a decisive balance of hardships; and that the requested relief would serve the public interest.
Court’s analysis
The court concluded that SFUSA had not shown irreparable harm. SFUSA conceded that the equipment was not unique, and the court found that it was neither unique nor irreplaceable. The court also noted that SFUSA’s relationship with Silver Chef would be preserved if SFUSA continued paying its obligations under the rental agreement. In addition, New WTC was unlikely to dispose of the equipment because it had represented that it would not remove it.
The court also found that SFUSA had not shown a likelihood of success in establishing a superior right to possess the equipment. The rental agreement stated that the equipment remained Silver Chef’s property and that SFUSA could not transfer or release it to a third party. SFUSA therefore had no ownership interest in the equipment. SFUSA also had not produced Slow NY’s lease with New WTC, which SFUSA acknowledged required Slow NY to leave all fixtures on New WTC’s premises.
The court further stated that it was unclear whether SFUSA could prove complete diversity between itself and the currently unknown members of New WTC. The parties were directed to take reasonable steps to determine whether New WTC had at least one non-U.S. individual or entity among its members, because the citizenship of a limited liability company’s members can affect federal diversity jurisdiction.
Disposition
The court denied SFUSA’s motion for emergency relief. The Clerk of Court was requested to terminate the motion at docket entry 5. The opinion did not decide who ultimately owned or had the right to possess the equipment.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.