From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Atl. Specialty Ins. Co. v. Landmark Unlimited, Inc.

Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Mar 14, 2023
214 A.D.3d 472 (N.Y. App. Div. 2023)

Opinion

17517 Index No. 650912/22 Case No. 2022–03154

03-14-2023

ATLANTIC SPECIALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff–Respondent, v. LANDMARK UNLIMITED, INC., et al., Defendants–Appellants, Anthony Calvano, Defendant.

Silverman Acampora LLP, Jericho (Anthony C. Acampora of counsel) and Richard T. Andrias, New York, for Landmark Unlimited, Inc., Landmark Signs & Electrical Maintenace Corp., Landmark Enterprises of N.Y. Inc., Lynn Calvano, Katherine Lettera and Heather Calvano, appellants. The Glass Law Group, PLLC, Plainview (Maxwell J. Glass of counsel), for Joseph Calvano, appellant. Chiesa Shahinian & Giantomasi PC, New York (Adam P. Friedman of counsel), for respondent.


Silverman Acampora LLP, Jericho (Anthony C. Acampora of counsel) and Richard T. Andrias, New York, for Landmark Unlimited, Inc., Landmark Signs & Electrical Maintenace Corp., Landmark Enterprises of N.Y. Inc., Lynn Calvano, Katherine Lettera and Heather Calvano, appellants.

The Glass Law Group, PLLC, Plainview (Maxwell J. Glass of counsel), for Joseph Calvano, appellant.

Chiesa Shahinian & Giantomasi PC, New York (Adam P. Friedman of counsel), for respondent.

Kapnick, J.P., Kern, Gesmer, Singh, Moulton, JJ.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Andrew Borrok, J.), entered on or about July 11, 2022, which granted plaintiff's motion for a mandatory preliminary injunction in the amount of $8,466,064 to be deposited with plaintiff as collateral, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

In order to prevail on a motion for a preliminary injunction, the movant must establish "a probability of success on the merits, danger of irreparable injury in the absence of an injunction and a balance of equities in its favor" ( Nobu Next Door, LLC v. Fine Arts Hous., Inc., 4 N.Y.3d 839, 840, 800 N.Y.S.2d 48, 833 N.E.2d 191 [2005] ). As to the likelihood of plaintiff's success on the merits, there are notarized signatures on the indemnity agreement apparently from all defendants. It is well settled that notarization carries a presumption of due execution ( Genger v. Arie Genger 1995 Life Ins. Trust, 84 A.D.3d 471, 922 N.Y.S.2d 347 [1st Dept. 2011] ; John Deere Ins. Co. v. GBE/Alasia Corp., 57 A.D.3d 620, 621, 869 N.Y.S.2d 198 [2008] ). All defendants assert in their affidavits that the signatures were forged. Some defendants also submitted copies of their driver's licenses for signature comparison. However, without more, defendants do not overcome the presumption of due notarization, especially considering that checks for the bonds were issued and signed by defendants Lynn Calvano and Joseph Calvano as representatives of the business.

Additionally, we have held that a surety will sustain irreparable harm when its indemnitors default on their obligation to deposit collateral security ( BIB Constr. Co. v. Fireman's Ins. Co. of Newark, N.J., 214 A.D.2d 521, 523, 625 N.Y.S.2d 550 [1st Dept. 1995] ). We noted in BIB Constr. Co. that "[t]he damage resulting from the failure to give security is not ascertainable, and the legal remedy is therefore inadequate." Moreover, although defendants assert that their signatures are forged, the indemnity contract specifically states that a failure to deposit collateral as requested by plaintiff "shall cause irreparable harm to [plaintiff] for which it has no adequate remedy at law, and [plaintiff] shall be entitled to injunctive relief for specific performance of such obligation."

As to the balance of the equities, proof in the record of defendants’ substantial assets negate concerns regarding financial hardship or inability to provide collateral. Moreover, defendants may ultimately recoup any collateral deposited over the amount of losses sustained.

We have considered defendant's remaining arguments and find them unavailing.


Summaries of

Atl. Specialty Ins. Co. v. Landmark Unlimited, Inc.

Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Mar 14, 2023
214 A.D.3d 472 (N.Y. App. Div. 2023)
Case details for

Atl. Specialty Ins. Co. v. Landmark Unlimited, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:Atlantic Specialty Insurance Company, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Landmark…

Court:Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Mar 14, 2023

Citations

214 A.D.3d 472 (N.Y. App. Div. 2023)
186 N.Y.S.3d 14
2023 N.Y. Slip Op. 1253

Citing Cases

Motichka v. MP 1291 Tr.

In any event, tenant cannot demonstrate her entitlement to a preliminary injunction. "In order to prevail on…

McGovern v. McGovern

Despite listing a handwriting expert on her pretrial witness list, the wife provided no evidence for this…