From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Pegasus Aviation I v. Varig Logistica S.A

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jan 19, 2010
69 A.D.3d 483 (N.Y. App. Div. 2010)

Opinion

No. 2002.

January 19, 2010.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Barbara R. Kapnick, J.), entered April 21, 2009, which denied MatlinPatterson's motion to dismiss the complaint, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Bracewell Giuliani LLP, New York (Kenneth A. Caruso of counsel), for appellant.

Boundas, Skarzynski, Walsh Black, LLC, New York (James T. Sandnes of counsel), for respondents.

Before: Mazzarelli, J.P., Saxe, Acosta, DeGrasse and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.


This is an action for replevin and damages for breach of airplane leases. Accepting the alleged facts as true and according plaintiff the benefit of every possible favorable inference ( Leon v. Martinez, 84 NY2d 83, 87-88), the complaint sufficiently alleges that MatlinPatterson exercised complete domination over Varig Logistica — and was thus its alter ego — with respect to the transaction at issue, and that such domination facilitated the fraud or wrongdoing that resulted in plaintiffs injury ( Matter of Morris v New York State Dept. of Taxation Fin., 82 NY2d 135, 141).


Summaries of

Pegasus Aviation I v. Varig Logistica S.A

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jan 19, 2010
69 A.D.3d 483 (N.Y. App. Div. 2010)
Case details for

Pegasus Aviation I v. Varig Logistica S.A

Case Details

Full title:PEGASUS AVIATION I, INC., et al., Respondents, v. VARIG LOGISTICA S.A. et…

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

Date published: Jan 19, 2010

Citations

69 A.D.3d 483 (N.Y. App. Div. 2010)
2010 N.Y. Slip Op. 375
894 N.Y.S.2d 30

Citing Cases

Wide Win Am., Inc. v. Newmark

The only allegations of fraud perpetrated against plaintiffs are that Newmark and Beare diverted the proceeds…