Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Engineered Devices Corp. v. Paramount Builders Group LLC

United States District Court, D. New Jersey

April 26, 2017

ENGINEERED DEVICES CORPORATION, Plaintiff,
v.
PARAMOUNT BUILDERS GROUP LLC, a foreign limited liability company, Defendant.

          MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

          HON. KEVIN MCNULTY, U.S.D.J.

         This is an action for damages based on a written contract. The plaintiff, Engineered Devices Corporation, is a supplier (by lease or sale) of materials, equipment, to the construction industry. The defendant, Paramount Builders Group LLC ("PBG"), engaged in a construction project in New York known as 310 West Hotel (the "Project"). Engineered's complaint alleges that PGB failed to return leased equipment or pay for purchased equipment. PBG blames a third party contractor, Martins, which worked on the Project. According to PBG, it was Martins who used, and failed to return, the equipment. Thus, says PBG, Martins is a necessary party under Fed.R.Civ.P. 19, and the action must be dismissed because Engineered did not name Martins as a defendant. For the reasons stated herein, the motion is denied.

         I.THE COMPLAINT

         The complaint alleges that Engineered maintains a rental inventory of shorting and forming equipment, and also manufactures equipment to order. (Cplt. ¶¶ 4-6) On May 27, 2015, Paramount (by its president, Gary Labovskiy) executed a commercial credit application, release, and Master Rental Agreement with Engineered. (Cplt. ¶¶ 13-15) Copies are attached to the Complaint. On the same date, PBG delivered a job information sheet for the 310 West Hotel Project, naming ZDG LLC as the general contractor. (Cplt. ¶ 18) Engineered approved Paramount's credit and delivered the equipment to PBG. (Cplt. ¶ 19) PBG failed to make payment for the goods sol, rented, and delivered. (Cplt. ¶ 20) Engineered claims damages in the total amount of $380, 823.17. (Cplt. ¶ 21) Jurisdiction is founded on diversity. (Cplt. ¶ 22)

         The Complaint has four counts. Count 1 asserts claims of book account and unjust enrichment in the amount of $156, 319.31. Count 2 asserts breach of contract and unjust enrichment in that Engineered, at PBG's request, delivered equipment and materials valued at $136, 621.59 to the project site, for which it was not paid. Count 3 alleges conversion of the same materials referred to in Count 2 and seeks the same damages. Count 4 seeks a contractual 30% collection charge in the amount of $87, 882.27.

         II. DISCUSSION

         PBG moves to dismiss the Complaint for failure to join Martins as a necessary party defendant under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 19:

(a) Persons Required to Be Joined if Feasible.
(1) Required Party. A person who is subject to service of process and whose joinder will not deprive the court of subject-matter jurisdiction must be joined as a party if:
(A) in that person's absence, the court cannot accord complete relief among existing parties; or
(B) that person claims an interest relating to the subject of the action and is so situated that disposing of the action in the person's absence may:
(i) as a practical matter impair or impede the person's ability to protect the interest; or
(ii) leave an existing party subject to a substantial risk of incurring double, multiple, or otherwise inconsistent ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.