Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Feb. 9, 2022

Flatiron Acquisition Vehicle, LLC v. CSE Mortgage LLC

Judge
Gregory Woods
Docket
1:17-cv-08987
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
4
Fee PetitionContractCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Flatiron Acquisition Vehicle v. CSE Mortgage, Judge Woods denied prejudgment interest on one fee award and ordered 9% interest on CSE’s other fee award.

Who this affects

The order affects Flatiron Acquisition Vehicle, LLC, CS Paradiso Holdings, LLC, CSE Mortgage LLC, and defendants CI and CF. It determines which attorneys’ fee awards receive prejudgment interest and directs entry of judgment for the specified amounts.

What happened

Flatiron Acquisition Vehicle, LLC and CS Paradiso Holdings, LLC sued CSE Mortgage LLC and other defendants. The court had already awarded the defendants $334,041.49 in attorneys’ fees on a counterclaim under a Tennessee-law settlement agreement and awarded CSE $326,137.64 under a New York-law purchase agreement.

The court declined to add prejudgment interest to the Tennessee-related award because the amount was uncertain, the dispute was complex and heavily litigated, and both sides had breached the settlement agreement. For the New York-related award, the court said prejudgment interest was required because the award resulted from a contract breach rather than equitable relief.

Judge Gregory H. Woods directed the Clerk to enter judgment for defendants CI and CF jointly for $334,041.49 and for CSE for $326,137.64, plus 9% annual prejudgment interest from March 17, 2019, through judgment. The court also directed that post-judgment interest accrue at the statutory rate, terminated outstanding motions, and closed the case.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Flatiron Acquisition Vehicle, LLC v. CSE Mortgage LLC · No. 1:17-cv-08987
Judge
Gregory Woods
Date
Feb. 9, 2022

Background

The court had previously resolved the remaining claims in the case except attorneys’ fees. It had awarded defendants $334,041.49 in attorneys’ fees on their counterclaim for breach of the Settlement Agreement, which was governed by Tennessee law. In a separate memorandum issued the same day as this order, the court awarded CSE $326,137.64 in attorneys’ fees and costs because CSE was a prevailing party under the Purchase Agreement, which was governed by New York law.

Tennessee Award

The court considered whether to add prejudgment interest—interest intended to compensate for the loss of use of money before judgment—to the $334,041.49 Tennessee award. Under Tennessee law, the decision is based on equity and is within the trial court’s discretion. Relevant considerations include whether the obligation and its amount were sufficiently certain and whether awarding interest would be fair under the circumstances.

The court concluded that prejudgment interest would not be equitable. The amount at issue was uncertain, and the dispute was complex and heavily litigated. The court also noted that both parties had breached the Settlement Agreement. Although defendants obtained judgment on their counterclaim because they were the first to cure their default, they were not wholly innocent because they had also breached the agreement. The court therefore did not impose prejudgment interest on the Tennessee Award.

New York Award

The court concluded that prejudgment interest was required for the $326,137.64 New York Award. New York law generally makes prejudgment interest mandatory when money is awarded for breach of a contract, unless the action is equitable in nature. The court determined that this award resulted from a contract breach, not equitable relief.

The court selected March 17, 2019, as the starting date because that was the date on which it dismissed Flatiron’s claims under the Purchase Agreement, making CSE a prevailing party entitled to attorneys’ fees. Interest would accrue at 9% per year through the date of judgment.

Disposition

Judge Gregory H. Woods directed the Clerk to enter judgment in favor of defendants CI and CF jointly for $334,041.49 and in favor of CSE for $326,137.64, plus prejudgment interest at 9% per year from March 17, 2019, through the date of judgment. Post-judgment interest would accrue at the rate set by 28 U.S.C. § 1961. The court also directed the Clerk to terminate all outstanding motions and close the case.

The authoritative version

Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.