AKF, Inc. v. Bargain Junction, LLC
1:21-cv-01074
N.D.N.Y.Jan 5, 2024Background
- FundKite (AKF, Inc.) entered into an agreement with Bargain Junction, LLC to purchase $568,000 of future receivables for a disbursement of $383,815.
- Bargain Junction agreed to remit 10% of its receipts weekly, with monthly reconciliations to adjust the payment amount.
- Several entities and individuals entered into a performance guaranty backing Bargain Junction's obligations.
- FundKite alleged an event of default due to blocked bank debits and sought summary judgment for breach of contract and breach of guaranty.
- Defendants disputed the breach, alleging errors in FundKite's payment calculations and denying responsibility for any account block or instructions to third parties.
- FundKite's summary judgment motion was denied due to a lack of admissible evidence supporting its breach claims.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract (block on bank account) | Bargain Junction blocked FundKite’s debits, breaching the agreement | No evidence FundKite's debits were blocked by defendants | No summary judgment; insufficient admissible evidence |
| Breach of contract (failure to remit receipts) | Bargain Junction refused to pay receipts as agreed | FundKite made errors in calculation, no refusal | No summary judgment; plaintiff did not show evidentiary basis |
| Breach of guaranty | Guarantors failed to ensure obligations were met | Underlying contract not breached; no evidence of failure | No summary judgment; same evidentiary deficiencies |
| Sufficiency of evidence for summary judgment | CEO’s declaration sufficient for summary judgment | Declaration is hearsay and unsupported | No summary judgment; plaintiff failed to provide admissible, documentary evidence |
Key Cases Cited
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (summary judgment standard)
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (summary judgment standard and burden)
- Knight v. U.S. Fire Ins. Co., 804 F.2d 9 (speculation and conjecture not enough to defeat summary judgment)
- Hicks v. Baines, 593 F.3d 159 (conclusory allegations cannot create genuine issue of material fact)
- Grice v. McCurdy, 498 F. Supp. 3d 400 (elements of breach of contract under New York law)
- Jeffreys v. City of New York, 426 F.3d 549 (genuine dispute of material fact required for jury trial)
- Dallas Aerospace, Inc. v. CIS Air Corp., 352 F.3d 775 (summary judgment: facts construed in non-movant’s favor)
- Brady v. Town of Colchester, 863 F.2d 205 (plaintiff’s evidentiary burdens at summary judgment)