Coudert Brothers LLP et al v. Varanese
Filing
18
ORDER: Accordingly, it is hereby: ORDERED that Judge Drain's Proposed Findings, dated October 21, 2016, are ADOPTED in their entirety. ORDERED that Plaintiff mail this Order by Federal Express International Mail Service, and through e-mail to De fendant and file a Certificate with the Court indicating that it did so; ORDERED that the Clerk of Court enter judgment for Plaintiff, pursuant to Judge Drain's recommendation in Judge Drains Proposed Findings. It is further ORDERED that the Cle rk of Court close this case and mail a copy of this Order to Defendant. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Kenneth M. Karas on 7/9/2020) (jca) Transmission to Docket Assistant Clerk for processing. Transmission to Orders and Judgments Clerk for processing.
Case 7:17-cv-03619-KMK Document 18 Filed 07/09/20 Page 1 of 4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
In re:
COUDERT BROTHERS LLP,
Debtor.
------------------------------------------------------X
DEVELOPMENT SPECIALISTS, INC., in its
capacity as Plan Administrator for Coudert
Brothers LLP,
No. 17-CV-3619 (KMK)
ORDER
Plaintiff,
v.
JAMES B. VARANESE,
Defendant.
KENNETH M. KARAS, United States District Judge:
In the wake of the dissolution and bankruptcy of an international law firm named Coudert
Brothers LLP (“Coudert”) headquartered in New York, Development Specialists, Inc.
(“Plaintiff”), in its capacity as the Plan Administrator for Coudert, commenced adversary actions
against several foreign former law partners at Coudert, including James B. Varanese
(“Defendant”), to enforce certain contractual obligations. (See Op. & Order on Proposed
Findings of Fact & Conclusions of Law (“May 2017 Li Op.”) 2 (Dkt. No. 2, Case No. 16-CV8237 (the “Li Action”)).) Plaintiff’s actions eventually culminated in a final award issued by an
arbitrator determining the amount of damages that Defendant owes Plaintiff. (Id. at 4.) Plaintiff
then moved in bankruptcy court to confirm the award. (Id. at 5.) In response to Plaintiff’s
Motion to Confirm the arbitration award, the Honorable Robert D. Drain (“Judge Drain”) issued
Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law (“Proposed Findings”), pursuant to the
Case 7:17-cv-03619-KMK Document 18 Filed 07/09/20 Page 2 of 4
bankruptcy court’s authority to hear non-core proceedings under 28 U.S.C. § 157(c)(1). (See
Dkt. No. 1, Case No. 17-CV-3619 (the “Varanese Action”).)
The Court identified service issues in this Action, and, despite delayed prosecution of this
Action, (see Order To Show Cause (Dkt. No. 2, Varanese Action)), the Court concluded that,
pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(f), Defendant may be served at his known
addresses and that Plaintiff had 30 days to do so, (Order 6–7 (Dkt. No. 6, Varanese Action)).
Plaintiff has submitted Certificates of Service stating that it has effectuated service of the
relevant documents in accordance with the Court’s January 23, 2020 Order and subsequent
Memo Endorsements. (See Certs. of Service (Dkt. Nos. 7,10,13, Varanese Action); see also Dkt.
Nos. 9, 12, Varanese Action).)
On May 12, 2020, after granting Defendant’s requests for extensions to properly serve
Plaintiff, the Court was satisfied with Plaintiff’s service efforts and issued an Order To Show
Cause requiring Defendant to respond within 30 days explaining why this Court should not adopt
Judge Drain’s Proposed Findings, or at the very least, requesting the opportunity to brief the
issue. (See Order to Show Cause (Dkt. No. 16, Varanese Action).) Pursuant to that Order,
Plaintiff also filed a Certificate of Service indicating that the Order to Show Cause was served
upon Defendant. (See Dkt. No. 17, Varanese Action.) The Clerk of Court also independently
mailed a copy of the Order to Show Cause to the address on record for Defendant. (See Dkt.
(entry for May 14, 2020), Varanese Action.) Defendant’s deadline to respond has passed, and
Defendant has not appeared in this Action at all.
For non-core proceedings, once a bankruptcy court issues proposed findings and
conclusions of law, typically, the “district court must then review those proposed findings and
conclusions de novo and enter any final orders or judgments.” Exec. Benefits Ins. Agency v.
2
Case 7:17-cv-03619-KMK Document 18 Filed 07/09/20 Page 3 of 4
Arkison, 573 U.S. 25, 34 (2014) (citation omitted) (italics omitted). However, as Defendant has
not appeared in the Action, no objections to adopting Judge Drain’s Proposed Findings have been
filed. The Bankruptcy Code mandates de novo review “of any portion of the bankruptcy judge’s
findings of fact or conclusions of law to which specific written objection has been made in
accordance with this rule.” Bankruptcy Rule 9033(d) (emphasis added). The Bankruptcy Code
also only mandates de novo review of “those matters to which any party has timely and
specifically objected.” 28 U.S.C. § 157(c)(1). Defendant has failed to file any objections or
even any intent to object to Judge Drain’s Proposed Findings within the prescribed time period,
and therefore, he has “waived [his] right to object to [Judge Drain’s] Proposed Findings.”
Messer v. Peykar Intern. Co., Inc., 510 B.R. 31, 38 (S.D.N.Y. 2014) (collecting cases).
Regardless, the Court has reviewed Judge Drain’s Proposed Findings and has found no
error in its findings of fact or conclusions of law. Therefore, the Court adopts Judge Drain’s
Proposed Findings.
Accordingly, it is hereby:
ORDERED that Judge Drain’s Proposed Findings, dated October 21, 2016, are
ADOPTED in their entirety.
ORDERED that Plaintiff mail this Order by Federal Express International Mail Service,
and through e-mail to Defendant and file a Certificate with the Court indicating that it did so;
ORDERED that the Clerk of Court enter judgment for Plaintiff, pursuant to Judge Drain’s
recommendation in Judge Drain’s Proposed Findings. It is further
3
Case 7:17-cv-03619-KMK Document 18 Filed 07/09/20 Page 4 of 4
ORDERED that the Clerk of Court close this case and mail a copy of this Order to
Defendant.
SO ORDERED.
Dated:
July 9, 2020
White Plains, New York
________________________________
KENNETH M. KARAS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
4
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?