Berkshire Bank v. Tedeschi, 041416 FED2, 15-471

Docket Nº:15-471
Party Name:Berkshire Bank, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Nancy K. Tedeschi, Defendant-Appellant.
Attorney:FOR PLAINTIFF -APPELLEE: David Valicenti, Cohen Kinne Valicenti & Cook LLP, Pittsfield, MA FOR DEFENDANT -APPELLANT: Nancy K. Tedeschi, pro se, Daytona Beach, FL.
Judge Panel:PRESENT: ROSEMARY S. POOLER, BARRINGTON D. PARKER, DEBRA ANN LIVINGSTON, Circuit Judges.
Case Date:April 14, 2016
Court:United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
 
FREE EXCERPT

Berkshire Bank, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

Nancy K. Tedeschi, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 15-471

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit

April 14, 2016

UNPUBLISHED OPINION

SUMMARY ORDER

RULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT. CITATION TO A SUMMARY ORDER FILED ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 2007, IS PERMITTED AND IS GOVERNED BY FEDERAL RULE OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE 32.1 AND THIS COURT'S LOCAL RULE 32.1.1. WHEN CITING A SUMMARY ORDER IN A DOCUMENT FILED WITH THIS COURT, A PARTY MUST CITE EITHER THE FEDERAL APPENDIX OR AN ELECTRONIC DATABASE (WITH THE NOTATION “SUMMARY ORDER”). A PARTY CITING TO A SUMMARY ORDER MUST SERVE A COPY OF IT ON ANY PARTY NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL.

At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, in the City of New York, on the 14th day of April, two thousand sixteen.

Appeal from an order of the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York (Kahn, J.).

FOR PLAINTIFF -APPELLEE: David Valicenti, Cohen Kinne Valicenti & Cook LLP, Pittsfield, MA

FOR DEFENDANT -APPELLANT: Nancy K. Tedeschi, pro se, Daytona Beach, FL.

PRESENT: ROSEMARY S. POOLER, BARRINGTON D. PARKER, DEBRA ANN LIVINGSTON, Circuit Judges.

UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the order of the district court is AFFIRMED.

Appellant Nancy Tedeschi, proceeding pro se, appeals the district court's order awarding Berkshire Bank attorney's fees and costs. Berkshire Bank sued Tedeschi, alleging that she had breached three promissory notes. In 2013, after the parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment, the district court granted Berkshire Bank summary judgment on two of its claims, dismissed its remaining claim for breach of contract, and ruled that it was entitled to attorney's fees and costs pursuant to the parties' contracts. Two years later, the court awarded Berkshire Bank attorney's fees and costs in the amount of approximately $40, 000. On appeal, the parties' briefs address both the 2013 order deciding the summary judgment motions and the 2015 fee award. We assume the parties' familiarity with the underlying facts, the procedural history of the case, and the issues on appeal.

The timely filing of a notice of appeal in a civil case, pursuant to Rule 4 of the...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP