Arthur Glick Truck Sales, Inc. v. Travelers Casualty & Surety Co. of America
577 F. App'x 11
2d Cir.2014Background
- Wolverine Fire Apparatus contracted with two fire districts to build complete fire trucks; Travelers provided surety bonds guaranteeing Wolverine's performance.
- Wolverine ordered chassis from Glick for the trucks; construction began but Wolverine filed for bankruptcy before completion.
- After bankruptcy, the Fire Districts filed claims on their respective bonds against Travelers; Travelers acquired the chassis from Wolverine's bankruptcy estate.
- Travelers arranged for completion and delivery of the trucks by other providers; Glick seeks damages for the value of the two chassis not paid by Wolverine.
- The District Court granted Travelers summary judgment; Glick sought reconsideration, which the court denied.
- The Second Circuit affirmed, addressing waiver, priority as buyers in the ordinary course, and Travelers' subrogation rights.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Fire Districts are buyers in the ordinary course | Glick contends the Fire Districts did not acquire priority over Glick's security interest. | Travelers argues the Fire Districts qualify as buyers in the ordinary course and take free of Glick's security interest. | Fire Districts are buyers in the ordinary course; Travelers is subrogated. |
| Whether Travelers' rights attach to the chassis free of Glick's interest due to bankruptcy | Glick asserts bankruptcy order retroactively negates the Fire Districts' priority. | Travelers maintains no retroactive negation effect and priority persists post-bankruptcy. | District Court’s interpretation upheld; no retroactive negation to undermine priority. |
| Whether waived arguments on appeal can be considered | Glick's arguments raised for the first time on appeal should be addressed. | Waiver doctrine bars new arguments not raised below; discretion to consider is limited. | Court declines to consider waived arguments; they are meritless or not properly preserved. |
| Standard of review and scope of review for summary judgment and reconsideration | Glick challenges the sufficiency of the District Court's reasons on summary judgment and reconsideration. | Standard de novo review for summary judgment; abuse-of-discretion review for reconsideration. | Standards applied as described; no reversible error found. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Nortel Networks Corp. Sec. Litig., 539 F.3d 129 (2d Cir. 2008) (courts may exercise discretion to consider waived arguments to avoid manifest injustice)
- Analytical Surveys, Inc. v. Tonga Partners, L.P., 684 F.3d 36 (2d Cir. 2012) (waiver of arguments raised for the first time on appeal; discretion to consider)
- Bogle-Assegai v. Connecticut, 470 F.3d 498 (2d Cir. 2006) (second alteration and omission in original; waiver and reconsideration standards)
- Psihoyos v. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 748 F.3d 120 (2d Cir. 2014) (de novo review standard for district court decisions on summary judgment)