In Other Media-eg New Statesman, AJE, FP, Georgia, NYT,  Azerbaijan, CSM Click here to contact us     .

By Matthew Russell Lee, Patreon Maxwell Book
BBC-Guardian UK - Honduras - ESPN NY Mag

SDNY COURTHOUSE, May 27 – London Luxury LLC sued HSBD in a dispute over payments related to PPE gloves.

On May 26, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York Judge Katherine Polk Failla held a proceeding to rule on London Luxury's request for a TRO. Inner City Press covered it, here.

After Inner City Press published its short report of the denial of the requested TRO, London Luxury, whose CEO is listed as Marc Jason, had a lawyer write to the Press with a legal threat: "Kenneth Hayes at epsteinostrove dot com via epsteinarlenostrove.onmicrosoft.com  12:59 PM (14 minutes ago) to Matthew Lee at innercitypress dot com and Elliot Ostorve at Epstein Ostrove dot com

  Mr. Lee:     I am writing to follow-up on my voicemail of a few moments ago.  This firm represents London Luxury LLC.  London Luxury hereby demands that the article posted by Inner City Press concerning yesterday’s hearing be retracted and removed immediately.  The article is fundamentally erroneous.  London Luxury commenced a lawsuit to stop a drawdown on a letter of credit being held by HSBC. The article does not reflect this very important distinction and, therefore, is most inaccurate.     We trust that Inner City Press desires to report the new accurately and, therefore, will withdraw the article immediately without the need for litigation."

 Consider it a letter to the editor. While not required, here's a quote from the amended complaint: "In connection with Plaintiff's efforts to source PPE from manufacturers in Malaysia, a line of credit was established with Standard Chartered Bank. The line of credit was originally in the amount of $4 million and later reduced $2 million.... Plaintiff obtained a standby letter of credit from Defendant [HSBC]... upon information and belief Ms Laas access the line of credit for the purpose of paying herself."

There, was that so difficult? What kind of company immediately threatens to sue over a published report that it was denied a TRO? Maybe a refresher on the First Amendment - and anti SLAPP law - is required.

 Here's a bit more about London Luxury and gloves: "Blue Star executives decided not to move forward with the partnership after learning of litigation involving Marc Jason, who was previously named co-CEO of the Blue Star-AGI joint venture. Jason is CEO of London Luxury LLC, which filed a Jan. 5 lawsuit in New York State Supreme Court against Walmart Inc., charging that Walmart owes the company about $41 million for boxes of nitrile gloves produced in Malaysia and Thailand. The complaint goes on to state that London Luxury could lose more than $500 million on a deal to sell tens of millions of boxes of gloves to the retail behemoth. “Walmart has created uncertainty regarding whether it intends to accept and pay for the vast majority of gloves it committed to buy,” the lawsuit claims. In an emailed statement, a spokesperson for Walmart said the company has filed a counterclaim against London Luxury “for their repeated failure to meet product standards and delivery obligations.” London Luxury did not immediately respond to requests for comment." And this is the company demanding that articles about the lawsuits it files be taken down.

SDNY Judge Failla recounted that no irreparable harm had been shown, nor likelihood of success on the merits.

Nevertheless, she said she would stay her decision for 24 hours to allow appeal to the Second Circuit, or longer if the parties write to her.

  But when London Luxury wrote it asking for a longer stay, it was quickly denied: "ORDER: denying [19] Letter Motion to Stay re: [19] LETTER MOTION to Stay. addressed to Judge Katherine Polk Failla from ELLIOT D. OSTROVE dated MAY 27, 2022. For the reasons outlined in the Court's oral decision of May 26, 2022,as supplemented by Defendant's above submission, Plaintiff's application for an extension of the stay of this Court's May 26, 2022 Order is hereby DENIED. Given the Court's ruling, any further relief sought by Plaintiff related to the instant emergency application must be directed to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate the pending motion at docket entry 19. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Katherine Polk Failla on 5/27/2022)."

Later on May 27, the Second Circuit denied London Luxury any emergency stay, and referred the matter to a three judge panel. But when? "MOTION ORDER, to the extent Appellant seeks an emergency or immediate stay, that request is denied. The motion for a stay pending appeal is referred to a three-judge motions panel, [10] filed by Appellant London Luxury LLC, by MHP, FILED. [3323178][17] [22-1159]."

The appeal is London Luxury LLC v. HSBC Bank USA, N.A., 22-1159 (Failla)

We will continue to follow this case.

The SDNY case is London Luxury LLC v. HSBC Bank USA, N.A., 22-cv-4235 (Failla) 

***

Your support means a lot. As little as $5 a month helps keep us going and grants you access to exclusive bonus material on our Patreon page. Click here to become a patron.

Feedback: Editorial [at] innercitypress.com
SDNY Press Room 480, front cubicle
500 Pearl Street, NY NY 10007 USA

Mail: Box 20047, Dag Hammarskjold Station NY NY 10017

Reporter's mobile (and weekends): 718-716-3540

Other, earlier Inner City Press are listed here, and some are available in the ProQuest service, and now on Lexis-Nexis.

 Copyright 2006-2022 Inner City Press, Inc. To request reprint or other permission, e-contact Editorial [at] innercitypress.com