Skip to main content
Nancy J. Heller

Nancy Heller’s Legal Cases

4 total

  • Preferred Capital, Inc. v. Check Mate Priority Servs.

    Practice Area:
    Contracts & Agreements
    Date:
    May 22, 2008
    Outcome:
    Court of Appeals ruled in favor of our client
    Description:
    Our client, which had no business or other contacts with the State of Ohio, was sued in Ohio pursuant to a "floating forum selection" clause in its contract. We moved to dismiss the case at the trial court level, and were initially denied. Since the plaintiff company had sued hundreds of similarly situated defendants, all of the cases were eventually consolidated in the Court of Common Pleas before a single judge. That judge agreed with us that the forum selection clause could not be used to hale our client into court in Ohio if our client had neither consented to being sued in Ohio, nor transacted any business in Ohio. The plaintiff appealed to the Court of Appeals. In its opinion, Preferred Capital, Inc. v. Check Mate Priority Servs., 2008 Ohio 2657, 2008 Ohio App. LEXIS 2243 (Ohio Ct. App., Cuyahoga County May 22, 2008), the Court of Appeals for the 8th District affirmed the trial court's ruling, and dismissed the lawsuit against our client.
  • FIRST CAPITAL CORPORATION v. G & J INDUSTRIES, INC.

    Practice Area:
    Contracts & Agreements
    Date:
    Apr 11, 2000
    Outcome:
    Court of Appeals ruled in our favor
    Description:
    This case involved a "three way" transaction that went bad. G&J Industries contracted with Louis Kovanda to sell it's business. Kovanda then brought in our client to finance the acquisition and the ongoing business operations with a factoring arrangement (accounts receivable financing). When Kovanda came to Akron to close the deal, he instead decided to pull out after meeting the G&J owners and reviewing documents. However, by the time he'd done that, all of the bank's paperwork had been signed, and our client (the bank) had wired money into the G&J bank accounts. Though the "old" owners of G&J insisted that they weren't responsible for repaying the money or complying with the loan documents - they used the money! Our client then sued to get the money back. The G&J owners counter-sued, claiming the bank acted improperly. The case was tried to a jury, which found in favor of our client and against the G&J owners on all aspects of the case. The G&J owners appealed to the 8th District Court of Appeals, which upheld the trial court in this decision: FIRST CAPITAL CORPORATION v. G & J INDUSTRIES, INC., 131 Ohio App. 3d 106; 721 N.E.2d 1084, 1999 Ohio App. LEXIS 195.
  • ASLANIDIS v. UNITED STATES LINES, INC.

    Practice Area:
    Chapter 11 Bankruptcy
    Date:
    Sep 27, 1993
    Outcome:
    Court of Appeals upheld District Court for us
    Description:
    The defendant in this case was the post-bankruptcy reorganization trust established to administer the assets of United States Lines and its related companies, which filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy relief in 1986. Plaintiff Emil Aslanidis was a seaman injured in a 1985 fire aboard a ship owned by US Lines. Like all other pre-petition claims, this one was stayed by the Bankruptcy Code. Personal injury claims like this one are governed by a three year statute of limitations, which had not yet expired at the time that US Lines for for bankruptcy relief. Plaintiff's lawyer moved in Bankruptcy Court for relief from the automatic stay in 1991, and the motion was granted. But plaintiff's lawyer failed to file his personal injury lawsuit within the 30 day period provided by 11 USC Section 108(c), so the Trust (my client) moved to dismiss the lawsuit. The Plaintiff argued that he still had the 18 months that remained on the limitations period when US Lines filed for bankruptcy protection, plus the 30 days provided by Section 108(c). For purposes of this litigation, that statute said that whenever there is a time limit to do something that is affected by a bankruptcy filing, the period of time that would otherwise have expired is extended for 30 days from, among other things, the date relief from the automatic stay is granted. The US District Court for the Southern District of NY ruled in favor of US Lines, and dismissed the lawsuit. Plaintiff appealed. The Second Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the decision of the District Court, and determined that the statute of limitations on the Plaintiff's personal injury case had continued to run, and had run out, during the US Lines bankruptcy proceedings. Therefore, by asking for relief from stay, Plaintiff's counsel set his own 30 day clock in motion, within which the new lawsuit against US Lines had to be filed.
  • Koenig Sporting Goods, Inc. v. Morse Road Company (In re Koenig Sporting Goods, Inc.)

    Practice Area:
    Chapter 11 Bankruptcy
    Date:
    Feb 16, 1999
    Outcome:
    Chapter 11 Bankruptcy Lease Rejection Issue
    Description:
    We represented the debtor-lessee. The courts (including the Court of Appeals, 203 F.3d 986, 987 (6th Cir. 2000)) ruled in favor of the creditor-landlord regarding the proper amount of post-petition rent due following lease rejection. Their decisions against our client have subsequently been criticized by other courts facing similar issues.