Document Type
Article
Publication Date
9-23-2008
Abstract
Defendant-appellant Schahin Engenharia Limitada ("Schahin") appeals from a February 13, 2007 order entered in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Scheindlin, J.) denying its motion to vacate a maritime writ of attachment held by plaintiff-appellee Consub Delaware LLC ("Consub"). The District Court held, pursuant to Winter Storm Shipping, Ltd. v. TPI, 310 F.3d 263 (2d Cir.2002), that funds that are the subject of an electronic funds transfer ("EFT") are property subject to a maritime attachment while they are in the hands of an intermediary bank. The District Court further found that clauses in agreements between the parties providing for exclusive jurisdiction over disputes arising from those agreements in the courts of England did not preclude Consub from seeking a maritime writ of attachment in the District Court or divest the District Court of jurisdiction to issue such a writ. For the reasons that follow, the judgment of the District Court is affirmed.
Recommended Citation
Steel '63, Lewis M., "Consub Delaware LLC v. Schahin Engenharia Limitada, 543 F. 3d 104 - Court of Appeals, 2nd Circuit 2008" (2008). Circuit Court Opinions. 439.
https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/circuit_opinions/439
Comments
543 F.3d 104 (2008)
CONSUB DELAWARE LLC, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. SCHAHIN ENGENHARIA LIMITADA, Defendant-Appellant, Standard Chartered Bank, Garnishee.
Docket No. 07-0833-cv. United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
Argued: May 15, 2008.
Decided: September 23, 2008.
New York Law School location: File #3688, Box #153