Although not venued in the Commercial Division, in an October 11, 2011, decision by New York County Justice Ling-Cohen, the court granted in part plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment on its claim for breach of contract. Plaintiff, a New York jewelry merchant, provided rocker/actress Courtney Love with approximately $150,000 in jewelry under a consignment contract in connection with a Manhattan charity event that she attended in September 2010. When Love failed to return the jewelry, plaintiff sued for the retail value of the jewelry and moved for summary judgment on its claims before discovery was completed. The court considered the motion despite its pre-mature nature, finding that “a lack of note of issue is not a bar to [a] motion [under CPLR 3212]” and that Love’s outstanding demands for information related to the value of the jewelry and mitigation of damages were not “facts essential to justify opposition” under CPLR 3212 (f). The court then granted plaintiff’s motion for breach of contract as to liability only, finding that Love failed to dispute the fact that she did not return the jewelry and failed to raise any other factual issues regarding liability. Because a bailee is not liable for the retail value of lost property under the law, the court referred the matter for a damages trial on the market value of the jewelry. Finally, because there was no dispute that the jewelry was “lost through negligence or stolen,” the court denied plaintiff’s motion as to its cause of action for conversion and dismissed the claim.
Diamond Quasar Jewelry, Inc. v Courtney Love Cobain, Sup Ct, New York County, October 11, 2011, Ling-Cohen, J., Index No. 115215/2010