Loop Production v. Capital Connections LLC
797 F. Supp. 2d 338
S.D.N.Y.2011Background
- Plaintiff The Loop Production sues Capital Connections LLC, Escobar Entertainment, Inc., and individuals as alleged agents under RICO and New York law.
- Plaintiff seeks default judgments against Capital Connections, Escobar Entertainment, Durbert O'Neal Brandon, Jr., Alisha E. Harris, and Breeden for failure to respond.
- Plaintiff alleges Capital Connections advertised false authority to book artists (including Nelly) and demanded $40,000 to secure a non-existent booking.
- Plaintiff wired $40,000 to CCA; Defendants later claimed breach or non-receipt of funds and offered partial refunds or credits, all of which were allegedly fraudulent.
- Plaintiff asserts the entire contract and arbitration clause were void due to a fraudulent scheme; plaintiff seeks damages, treble under RICO, and attorneys’ fees.
- The court denied the moving defendants’ motion to vacate default and to dismiss, and granted default judgment against the defaulting defendants on most claims.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the default should be vacated | Defendants willfully ignored notices; default undue should be sustained. | Delay due to settlement talks and counsel mail issues; should be excused. | Default not vacated; willful default found and no meritorious defense. |
| Whether the complaint should be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction/arbitration | Arbitration clause does not bar RICO claims given fraud; jurisdiction exists. | Arbitration clause and lack of personal jurisdiction warrant dismissal. | Arbitration and jurisdiction defenses rejected; claims proceed in default posture. |
| Whether plaintiff is entitled to relief on the RICO and conspiracy claims | Defendants engaged in a pattern of wire fraud via a fraudulent scheme. | Merits of RICO/conspiracy defenses contested; no merits shown without response. | Plaintiff entitled to default judgment on RICO and conspiracy claims. |
| Whether plaintiff is entitled to relief on common law fraud and fraudulent inducement | Defendants knowingly misrepresented authority and representation of artists. | No responsive brief; defenses not shown. | Plaintiff entitled to default judgment on fraud and fraudulent inducement. |
| Whether plaintiff is entitled to relief on breach of contract and conversion | Contract void due to fraud; conversion occurred when funds were kept. | Contract defenses and lack of contract validity argued; not supported without response. | No default judgment on breach of contract; damages awarded on conversion and other claims. |
Key Cases Cited
- Odfjell Seachem A/S v. Continental De Petrols Et Invs. SA, 613 F. Supp. 2d 497 (S.D.N.Y. 2009) (willful default requires more than mere negligence)
- Commercial Bank of Kuwait v. Rafidain Bank, 15 F.3d 238 (2d Cir. 1994) (three-factor test for setting aside default)
- New York v. Green, 420 F.3d 99 (2d Cir. 2005) (meritorious defenses are key in default judgments)
- SEC v. McNulty, 137 F.3d 732 (2d Cir. 1998) (meritorious defense requires potential complete defense)
- Weinrott v. Carp, 32 N.Y.2d 190 (N.Y. 1973) (fraud invalidates contracts under grand scheme theory)
- Doctor's Assocs., Inc. v. Casarotto, 517 U.S. 681 (U.S. 1996) (contract defenses to arbitration agreements)
- Parke-Bernet Galleries, Inc. v. Franklyn, 26 N.Y.2d 13 (N.Y. 1970) (personal jurisdiction over non-domiciliaries via contract)
