Opinion
No. 2521 Index No. 656782/21 Case No. 2022-04120
06-18-2024
Maria Tzanakakis etc., Appellant, v. Joseph E. Royce, et al., Respondents, Jaime Leroux, et al., Defendants.
Meimaris Law Group LLC, New York (Alkistis G. Meimaris of counsel), for appellant. Bleakley, Platt & Schmidt, LLP, White Plains (Adam Rodriguez of counsel), for Joseph E. Royce and Lawrence A. Blatte, respondents. Seward & Kissel LLP, New York (Noah S. Czarny of counsel), for TBS Shipping Services Inc., and Guardian Navigation Services Inc., respondents.
Meimaris Law Group LLC, New York (Alkistis G. Meimaris of counsel), for appellant.
Bleakley, Platt & Schmidt, LLP, White Plains (Adam Rodriguez of counsel), for Joseph E. Royce and Lawrence A. Blatte, respondents.
Seward & Kissel LLP, New York (Noah S. Czarny of counsel), for TBS Shipping Services Inc., and Guardian Navigation Services Inc., respondents.
Before: Manzanet-Daniels, J.P., Kennedy, Scarpulla, Shulman, Higgitt, JJ.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Jennifer Schecter, J.), entered August 19, 2022, which granted defendants TBS Shipping Services, Inc. (TBS), Guardian Navigation Services, Inc., Joseph E. Royce, and Lawrence A. Blatte's motions to dismiss the amended complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Supreme Court properly dismissed the amended complaint as barred by collateral estoppel. The allegations in plaintiff's third amended complaint in the federal action were substantially identical to her amended complaint herein. The federal action was dismissed because plaintiff failed to establish standing. That is, she did not own the shares that were allegedly stolen, instead her husband, Alkiviades Meimaris did, although she claimed she inherited those shares (see Parker Madison Partners v Airbnb, Inc., 184 A.D.3d 544, 545 [1st Dept 2020] ["the issue of plaintiff's injury was 'necessarily... decided' in the prior federal action between the parties, and plaintiff was granted a 'full and fair opportunity to contest' that finding"], quoting Buechel v Bain, 97 N.Y.2d 295, 303-304 [2001], cert denied 535 U.S. 1096 [2002]).
While plaintiff brought the federal action in her capacity as representative of Alkiviades Meimaris's estate, she also brought individual claims, as she does here, and the dismissal of those individual claims bars plaintiff from relitigating those claims here.
Plaintiff unpersuasively relies on the fact that the federal action was dismissed without prejudice. "[W]here a case is dismissed for lack of Article III standing... that disposition cannot be entered with prejudice, and instead must be dismissed without prejudice" (Katz v Donna Karan Co., L.L.C., 872 F.3d 114, 121 [2d Cir 2017]). As the motion court observed, that does not mean that plaintiff may simply litigate elsewhere.
We have considered plaintiff's remaining contentions and find them unavailing.