Edelman Arts, Inc. v. Spoelstra et al
| Edelman Arts, Inc. |
| Remko Spoelstra, Jason Holloway, SSR Invest Switzerland, Swiss Business Council and John Doe |
| 1:2017cv04789 |
| June 23, 2017 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| Katherine B. Forrest |
| Other Contract |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
127
CLERK'S JUDGMENT re: 126 Order Adopting Report and Recommendations. in favor of Edelman Arts, Inc. against SSR Invest Switzerland, Swiss Business Council, Jason Holloway, Remko Spoelstra in the amount of $ 7,870,060.27. It is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED: That for the reasonsstated in the Court's Memorandum Opinion and Order dated March 7, 2021, the Court adopts theReport and Recommendation in all respects except the calculation of the prejudgment interest. TheCler k is directed to enter judgment in favor of the plaintiffs and against the defendants in the amountof $5,700,000, of which $1,000,000 is to be retained in escrow by the Court until the plaintiffpresents evidence that the plaintiff has satis fied the judgment against it in the amount of $1,000,000entered in Edelman Arts, Inc. v. N.Y. Art World, LLC, No. 652017/2018, 2019 WL 6700444 (N.Y.Sup. Ct. Dec. 9, 2019). The judgment should also include prejudgment interest calculated by theCl erk at the annual rate of nine percent from December 15, 2016 to the date judgment is entered.Judgment is entered in the amount of $5,700,000 plus prejudgment interest at the rate of nine percentper annum from December 15, 2016 through the date of entry of judgment, in the amount of$2,170,060.27 for a total sum of $7,870,060.27; accordingly, this case is closed. (Signed by Clerk of Court Ruby Krajick on 3/8/2021) (Attachments: # 1 Notice of Right to Appeal) (dt) Transmission to Finance Unit (Cashiers) for processing.
|
|
Filing
126
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER for 121 Report and Recommendations. The Court therefore adopts the Report and Recommendation in all respects except the calculation of the prejudgment interest. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment in favor of the plaintiffs and against the defendants in the amount of $5,700,000, of which $1,000,000 is to be retained in escrow by the Court until the plaintiff presents evidence that the plaintiff has satisfied the judgment against it in the amount of $1,000,000 entered in Edelman Arts, Inc. v. N.Y. Art World, LLC, No. 652017/2018, 2019 WL 6700444 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. Dec. 9, 2019). The judgment should also include prejudgment interest calculated by the Clerk at the annual rate of nine percent from December 15, 2016 to the date judgment is entered. The Clerk is also directed to close all pending motions and to close this case.SO ORDERED., (Signed by Judge John G. Koeltl on 3/7/21) (yv) Transmission to Finance Unit (Cashiers) for processing. Transmission to Orders and Judgments Clerk for processing.
|
|
Filing
124
ORDER. The plaintiff is directed to serve the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, ECF. No 121, on the defendants at their last known email address and file proof of service by February 17, 2021. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge John G. Koeltl on 2/12/21) (yv)
|
|
Filing
119
ORDER denying 110 Motion to Intervene. For reasons stated at the conference held on October 1, 2020, the motion to intervene by Holdrum Investments NA, Dkt. No. 110, is denied. The Clerk is directed to close Dkt. No. 110. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge John G. Koeltl on 10/1/2020) (ks) Modified on 10/2/2020 (ks).
|
|
Filing
102
ORDER: It is hereby ORDERED that, by no later than June 12, 2020, Plaintiff shall supplement the record by filing: (1) any admissible evidence reflecting an agreement with the Defendants as to the commission rate; (2) any admissible evidence on th e usual and customary commission rate for this type of agreement; (3) any admissible evidence that Plaintiff was "ready, willing and able" to perform under the contract; (4) any admissible evidence of Plaintiff's effort to mitigate d amages. The legal consequences, if any, related to mitigation; (5) any legal basis for finding that Defendants are obligated to pay a commission even if the art remains in the custody of the broker, possession of the seller, or both; (6) any legal basis for finding that the defendants owe Plaintiff the difference between the sale price agreed upon between the parties for a piece of art and the subsequent (lesser) actual sale price of that piece of art between non-parties; and (7) any other admissible evidence and/or legal basis supporting a finding of Plaintiffs entitlement to the amount of damages sought under the specific theories of recovery put forth by Plaintiff. The Court hereby notifies the parties that it may conduct this inq uest based solely upon their written submissions. See Action S.A. v. Marc Rich & Co., 951 F.2d 504, 508 (2d Cir. 1991); Fustok v. ContiCommodity Servs. Inc., 873 F.2d 38, 40 (2d Cir. 1989). (As further set forth in this order.) (Signed by Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn on 5/29/2020) (cf)
|
|
Filing
101
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER : Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b) (3), the case is recommitted to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge John G. Koeltl on 5/5/2020) (ks)
|
|
Filing
100
OPINION & ORDER re: 98 MOTION to Amend/Correct 94 Report and Recommendations, of Magistrate Judge Netburn, MOTION for Reconsideration re; 94 Report and Recommendations, of Magistrate Judge Netburn, filed by Edelman Arts, Inc. Plaintiff's motion to amend is DENIED. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to terminate the motion at ECF No. 98. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn on 3/13/2020) (ras)
|
|
Filing
96
ORDER granting 95 Letter Motion for Extension of Time to File. APPLICATION GRANTED. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge John G. Koeltl on 1/28/2020) (va)
|
|
Filing
92
ORDER: By Wednesday, December 18, 2019, Plaintiff is directed to file a letter of no more than five pages to supplement its Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. Specifically, Plaintiff should set forth in greater detail the factual and legal basis for calculating damages based on a combination of potential commissions and the difference between the asking price and sale price of one "Haring work" (the invoice for which is included in Plaintiff's Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law at "Exhibit D"). See ECF No. 90 at ¶ 22. The letter may cite to the materials attached as Exhibits to Plaintiff's prior submission. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn on 12/10/2019) (ras)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the New York Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
