From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cargill Fin. Serv. v. Bank Fin. and Credit

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Feb 11, 2010
70 A.D.3d 456 (N.Y. App. Div. 2010)

Opinion

February 11, 2010.

Three orders, Supreme Court, New York County (Charles E. Ramos, J.), entered July 7, 2009, which, as corrected and memorialized in an order entered August 5, 2009, denied plaintiff's application for an order of attachment of all funds contained in defendant's correspondent accounts located in New York and vacated a temporary restraining order previously granted by the court, unanimously affirmed, with costs. The June 18, 2009 temporary restraining order, which was extended by order of this Court entered September 8, 2009, is vacated.

Before: Mazzarelli, J.P., Andrias, Moskowitz, Renwick and Renwick, JJ.


Contrary to the motion court's conclusion, plaintiffs evidence established a basis for quasi in rem jurisdiction, in that defendant, a Ukranian bank, utilized its New York correspondent accounts to receive funds and make interest payments pursuant to the terms of the parties' loan agreements and associated letters of credit ( see generally Banco Ambrosiano v Artoc Bank Trust, 62 NY2d 65). Even if plaintiff established a statutory basis for attachment of the accounts, given the nature of correspondent banking and its importance in international transactions, the court did not abuse its discretion by denying plaintiff's broad request to restrain all funds in the accounts. The evidence showed that a substantial part of the funds therein was held for the benefit of third-party clients of defendant who used the accounts to transact foreign business in U.S. currency. Thus, the wholesale attachment of all funds in the accounts would have interfered with innocent third parties' access to their money. As such, it was within the court's discretion to deny plaintiff's attachment application ( see Morgenthau v Avion Resources Ltd., 49 AD3d 50, mod on other grounds 11 NY3d 383; J.V.W. Inv. Ltd. v Kelleher, 41 AD3d 233).

The decision and order of this Court entered herein on October 27, 2009 ( 66 AD3d 589) is hereby recalled and vacated ( see 2010 NY Slip Op 63106[U] [decided simultaneously herewith]).


Summaries of

Cargill Fin. Serv. v. Bank Fin. and Credit

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Feb 11, 2010
70 A.D.3d 456 (N.Y. App. Div. 2010)
Case details for

Cargill Fin. Serv. v. Bank Fin. and Credit

Case Details

Full title:CARGILL FINANCIAL SERVICES INTERNATIONAL, INC., Appellant, v. BANK FINANCE…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Feb 11, 2010

Citations

70 A.D.3d 456 (N.Y. App. Div. 2010)
896 N.Y.S.2d 317

Citing Cases

Iraq Telecom Ltd. v. IBL Bank S.A.L.

It has also held that that discretion includes the power to consider nonstatutory factors. SeeCargill Fin.…

Krineta Enters. Co. v. Lavidas

The decision whether to grant a motion for an order of attachment or to confirm or vacate such an order…