Musso v. OTR Media Group, Inc., No. 1:2017cv04733 - Document 23 (E.D.N.Y. 2018)

Court Description: OPINION and ORDER affirming the decision of the Bankruptcy Court. Ordered by Judge Nina Gershon on 5/31/2018. (Barrett, C)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ---------------------x In re F1L.L IN CLERKS OFFiCE U.S. DISTRICT COURT EDNY * MAY 312018 * LADDER 3 CORP. Debtor. ---------------------------------------------x OTR MEDIA GROUP, INC., OPINION and ORDER Appellant-Defendant, No. 17-cv-04733 (NG) V. ROBERT J. MUSSO, Chapter 7 Trustee of the Estate of Ladder 3 Corp. Appellee-Plaintiff. ---------------------------------------------x GERSHON, United States District Judge: Appellant-defendant OTR Media Group, Inc. ("OTR") appeals the decision of the Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of New York (Craig, Chief Judge) denying OTR's motion for summary judgment and granting the summary judgment motion of Appellee-Plaintiff Robert J. Musso, the Trustee of Chapter 7 debtor Ladder 3 Corp. ("Ladder 3"). In re Ladder 3 Corp., 571 B.R. 525 (Bankr. E.D.N.Y. 2017), motion for relieffrom judgment denied, 2018 WL 722405 (Bankr. E.D.N.Y. 2018). On March 28, 2018, I denied OTR's motion for direct certification of appeal to the Second Circuit. In re Ladder 3 Corp., 2018 WL 2298349, at *4 (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 28, 2018). In that decision, I reviewed the facts and procedural history of the case—which I decline to repeat here—and explained why 11 U.S.C. § 349(b)(2)–(3) did not nullify the Stipulation of Settlement reached by the parties in the 2010 Adversary Proceeding. I have considered OTR' s argument on appeal (of which there is only one, as OTR has abandoned 1 Dockets.Justia.com its argument under § 349(b)(2)) and find it to be meritless. For substantially the reasons stated in my certification decision, the decision of the Bankruptcy Court is affirmed. SO ORDERED. /s/ Nina Gershon NINA GERSHON United States District Judge May 31, 2018 Brooklyn, New York 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.