TRIBORO HARDWARE & INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY CORP. v. GREENBLUM
2:19-cv-13416
| D.N.J. | Dec 3, 2020Background
- Triboro, a New Jersey industrial-supply company, retained New York/New Jersey–licensed attorney Justin Greenblum in 2017 to pursue unpaid trade debts and related matters.
- While acting as Triboro’s counsel, Greenblum obtained five interest-free loans from Triboro (May 31, 2017–Sept. 5, 2018) totaling $450,000, allegedly without written terms or client advisals required by RPC 1.8.
- Greenblum made six partial repayments totaling about $122,000; Triboro asserts an outstanding loan balance of $328,000 and alleges additional damages (attorney fees and collection costs), seeking total damages of $396,074.20.
- Triboro sued for breach of contract, unjust enrichment, promissory estoppel, and breach of fiduciary duty; Greenblum failed to appear or answer and the Clerk entered default.
- The Court found subject-matter and specific personal jurisdiction over Greenblum, concluded Triboro stated viable breach-of-contract and fiduciary-duty claims (dismissing unjust enrichment and promissory estoppel as duplicative), and granted default judgment in principle but requested supplemental proof on attorneys’ fees and pre-judgment interest.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Personal jurisdiction | Greenblum purposefully directed activities to NJ by representing and borrowing from a NJ client and litigating in NJ | No response; did not contest jurisdiction | Court found prima facie specific jurisdiction and fair-play satisfied |
| Service of process | Process server personally served Greenblum at his office | No response | Service adequate under Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(e) and NJ rules |
| Sufficiency of breach-of-contract claim | Parties formed (express or implied) loan agreements totaling $450,000; Greenblum breached by partial repayment only | No answer/meritorious defense not shown | Complaint plausibly alleges contract, breach, and $328,000 in contract damages |
| Sufficiency of fiduciary-duty claim | As Triboro’s lawyer, Greenblum owed duties of loyalty, candor, care; self-dealing and RPC violation support tort claim and proximate damages | No answer | Court found fiduciary-duty claim plausibly pleaded and not duplicative of contract claim |
| Unjust enrichment & promissory estoppel | Alternative remedies for the same facts | No answer | Dismissed as duplicative after breach-of-contract established |
| Default judgment factors (culpability & prejudice) | Default and non-response prejudiced Triboro’s ability to recover | No response/excuse | Default appropriate; defendant culpable for failing to respond |
| Damages (fees & interest) | Requests $328,000 principal plus attorneys’ fees, pre-judgment and post-judgment interest | No response | Court authorized principal and tort-related fee recovery but required Triboro to file fee invoices under seal and to justify pre-judgment interest rate and scope before final judgment |
Key Cases Cited
- Hritz v. Woma Corp., 732 F.2d 1178 (3d Cir.) (default-judgment entry committed to district court discretion)
- O’Connor v. Sandy Lane Hotel Co. Ltd., 496 F.3d 312 (3d Cir.) (federal courts apply forum state personal-jurisdiction law)
- Grimes v. Vitalink Commc’ns Corp., 17 F.3d 1553 (3d Cir.) (distinguishes general and specific jurisdiction)
- DIRECTV, Inc. v. Pepe, 431 F.3d 162 (3d Cir.) (treat complaint allegations as true in default except as to damages)
- Comdyne I, Inc. v. Corbin, 908 F.2d 1142 (3d Cir.) (same principle for default-judgment facts)
- Packard-Bamberger & Co. v. Collier, 771 A.2d 1194 (N.J.) (attorney-fee recovery permissible where breach of loyalty arises from attorney-client relationship)
- In re Torre, 127 A.3d 690 (N.J.) (attorney’s economic interests can breach loyalty to client)
- Saint Barnabas Med. Ctr. v. Essex Cty., 543 A.2d 34 (N.J.) (conduct can establish implied-in-fact contract)