North Fork Partners Investment Holdings, LLC v. Forbright Bank
- Lewis Liman
- 1:22-cv-07060
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In North Fork Partners v. Forbright Bank, Judge Liman granted defendants’ motions to stay the case and postpone their answers.
North Fork Partners Investment Holdings, LLC and the defendants—Forbright Bank, Forbright, Inc., Henagan Spencer Capital Partners, and Patriot Finance LLC—are affected. The case is paused, and the defendants’ time to answer is postponed pending further order.
What happened
North Fork Partners Investment Holdings, LLC sued Forbright Bank and other defendants. The defendants asked the court to pause this case while it considered summary-judgment motions in a related action.
The defendants also asked for more time to answer the complaint. They argued that waiting for the related case could make this dispute more efficient or help determine what discovery would be needed. The plaintiff did not show that a stay would cause prejudice.
Judge Lewis J. Liman granted the motions. The case is stayed until further order, and the defendants’ time to answer is postponed. The parties must submit a joint letter within two weeks after the ruling on summary judgment in the related action.
The detailed version
- North Fork Partners Investment Holdings, LLC v. Forbright Bank · No. 1:22-cv-07060
- Lewis Liman
- Feb. 1, 2023
Background
Forbright Bank and Forbright, Inc. moved to stay, or pause, this case while the court ruled on summary-judgment motions in a related action, identified in the opinion by docket number 20-cv-2444. Henagan Spencer Capital Partners and Patriot Finance LLC joined the arguments supporting the stay. The defendants also asked the court to postpone their deadline to answer.
Reasons for the ruling
The court explained that it has authority to pause proceedings to manage its docket efficiently. The defendants showed that waiting for the decision on summary judgment in the related action could create significant efficiencies in resolving this dispute or in determining how discovery should proceed. The court stated that the stay would be relatively short and that North Fork Partners had not shown prejudice from the delay.
Ruling
The court granted the motions to stay and to postpone the defendants’ time to answer. The parties must submit a joint letter within two weeks after the court issues its order on the summary-judgment motion in the related action, stating their positions on how that decision should affect this case’s prosecution and management. The defendants’ time to answer is adjourned pending further order. The Clerk of Court was directed to close Docket Nos. 51, 59, and 61.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.