Maricultura Del Norte, S. De R.L. De C.V. v. Worldbusiness Capital, Inc.
- Colleen McMahon
- 1:14-cv-10143
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Maricultura Del Norte v. Worldbusiness Capital, Judge McMahon denied Servax’s request to collect $1,471,763.74 while Umami’s appeal was pending.
Servax Bleu, S. de R.L. de C.V.’s request to enforce payment of the Amended Judgment was denied pending Umami Sustainable Seafood, Inc.’s appeal; Atlantic Specialty Insurance Company was the bond surety that Servax asked the court to direct to pay.
What happened
In Maricultura Del Norte, S. de R.L. de C.V. v. Worldbusiness Capital, Inc., Servax asked the court to order Atlantic Specialty Insurance Company, the surety on Umami’s supersedeas bond, to pay the revised judgment of $1,471,763.74, plus $49.67 in daily interest.
Umami opposed the request, arguing that payment was not yet due because it could appeal the court’s order concerning its request to reopen or revise the judgment. Umami filed that appeal on March 16, 2020. The court noted that an appeal could address only the denial of that request, not the underlying judgment, which the Court of Appeals had already affirmed.
Judge McMahon denied Servax’s request for payment pending resolution of Umami’s appeal.
The detailed version
- Maricultura Del Norte, S. De R.L. De C.V. v. Worldbusiness Capital, Inc. · No. 1:14-cv-10143
- Colleen McMahon
- Mar. 17, 2020
Background
The court had previously resolved outstanding issues involving cross-motions to reopen and revise the judgment filed by Servax Bleu, S. de R.L. de C.V. and judgment debtor Umami Sustainable Seafood, Inc. The parties agreed that the current value of the Amended Judgment was $1,471,763.74.
Servax moved for an order requiring Atlantic Specialty Insurance Company, the surety on Umami’s supersedeas bond, to satisfy that amount, plus $49.67 in interest per day, within five business days. Umami opposed the motion, arguing that the judgment was not yet final for payment purposes because Umami still had the opportunity to appeal the court’s order concerning its request to reopen or revise the judgment. Umami filed that appeal on March 16, 2020.
Court’s Analysis
The court noted that Umami had already appealed the Amended Judgment and that the Court of Appeals had affirmed it. The court explained that any further appeal would concern only the denial of Umami’s request under Rule 60 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, not the merits of the underlying judgment. The court nevertheless recognized that Umami could appeal on those limited grounds.
Disposition
The court DENIED Servax’s request for an order requiring payment of $1,471,763.74, pending resolution of Umami’s appeal. The opinion does not state that the request was denied with or without prejudice.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.