Coughlan v. Jachney
Decision Date | 20 July 2020 |
Docket Number | 18-CV-2125(SJF)(AKT) |
Citation | 473 F.Supp.3d 166 |
Parties | Robert COUGHLAN and Aileen Coughlin, Plaintiffs, v. Kyle JACHNEY, Richard Jachney and Hylas Yachts, Inc., Defendants. |
Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of New York |
Jarrett M. Behar, Certilman Balin Adler & Hyman, LLP, Hauppauge, NY, for Plaintiffs.
Jeffrey S. Baker, Pro Hac Vice, Baker and Associates, Boston, MA, for Defendants.
I.Introduction
On or about April 10, 2018, plaintiffsRobert Coughlan("Robert") and Aileen Coughlan("Aileen")(collectively, "plaintiffs") commenced this action against, inter alia , defendantKyle Jachney("defendant")1 pursuant to this Court's diversity of citizenship jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a), seeking damages for defendant's alleged breach of contract, unjust enrichment, conversion and fraud.Pending before the Court are plaintiffs’ motion pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for summary judgment on their conversion and fraud claims; and defendant's cross motion for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure dismissing plaintiffs’ claims against him in their entirety.For the reasons set forth below, plaintiffs’ motion is denied and defendant's cross motion is granted.
II.Background
According to defendant, Hylas builds custom designed yachts.(Affidavit of Kyle Jachney dated May 20, 2019 ["Jachney Aff."], ¶ 35).From 1999 until Hylas ceased to exist, defendant's duties at Hylas, including when he was the vice president of Hylas, included sales, marketing, production and process management, advertising boat shows, deliveries, commissioning3 and design.(Declaration of Robert Coughlan in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment["Coughlan Decl."], Ex. B at 9:14-25, 10:2-11, 163:19-25, 164:2-10).In addition to defendant and his father, who owned Hylas, Hylas had four (4) employees: Gayle Winters("Winters"), who "handled the books, [and] just oversaw the kind of general paperwork;"Carol Israel, who worked part-time "answering phones, sending out emails, sending out inquiries, [and] marketing materials;"Christian Pschorr, who "was commissioning manager and service manager," and who "also did deliveries, [and] boat show setups;" and Michael Tamulaites("Tamulaites"), who did sales and "was replacing [defendant's]father who was slowing down significantly and went into semiretirement that year [2015]."(Id. at 20:25-22:11).
Plaintiffs first met defendant at various boat shows.(56.1, ¶ 3)4 .
Aileen entered into a contract with Hylas, dated November 10, 2015(the "Sales Agreement"), pursuant to which, inter alia , "Seller [Hylas] agree[d] to construct and Buyer [Aileen] agree[d] to purchase one 2017 Hylas 56 (the ‘Yacht’) designed by German Frers and constructed by Queen Long Marine Co., Ltd. of Kaoshiung, Taiwan R.O.C. (‘Queen Long’)".(56.1, ¶¶ 4, 98;CoughlanDecl., Ex. A, ¶ 1).Although the Sales Agreement was initially drafted by Hylas, (56.1, ¶ 8), Robert participated in the negotiation of it and testified that there were many iterations of the Sales Agreement.(Transcript of the deposition testimony of Robert Coughlan on February 5, 2019 ["Coughlan Tr."]at 61:2-10).The Sales Agreement is signed by defendant on behalf of Hylas.(56.1, ¶ 5).
The Sales Agreement contains the following "Payment and Production Schedule":
(CoughlanDecl., Ex. A, ¶ 2).Robert asserts that "[a]t the time that the Sales Agreement was executed, ... [he] understood the word ‘deposit’ to have its common meaning, i.e. , that it was to be security for the performance of the Sales Agreement."(Id. , ¶ 6).Defendant essentially agrees that the term "deposit" in the Sales Agreement should be accorded its plain and ordinary meaning, and he, thus, refers to the dictionary definition for the meaning of that word.7(SeeJachneyAff., ¶ 25[ ] ).
In addition, the Sales Agreement sets a base price for the Yacht, including all standard equipment as shown therein, "fully commissioned, seaworthy and ready to sail," and provides, in relevant part:
(CoughlanDecl., Ex. A., ¶ 3).Thus, the base price for the Yacht under the Sales Agreement was one million eighteen thousand dollars ($1,018,000.00).(Id. ).
According to defendant, "[f]rom the time that the Sales Agreement is signed, the process of designing the Yacht for the Purchaser commences,"(JachneyAff., ¶ 36); and "Hylas designs the yacht on an ongoing, continuous basis."(Id. , ¶ 37;see alsoCoughlanDecl., Ex. B at 138:2-12[ ] ).During his deposition, defendant testified that Hylas did not have any practice or procedures for keeping track of the time spent during the design process, but "there are numerous hours that are spent communicating with the yard," and there were "multiple sets of drawings ... [and] design lists, and then there was a hundred and something pages of communications back and forth and phone calls."(CoughlanDecl., Ex. B at 138:17-139:4).According to defendant, Queen Long created the drawings for the Yacht "based on the information that [he] gave them."(Id.at 139:5-8).Moreover, defendant testified that the Sales Agreement includes a charge for the time Hylas spent in design in "[t]he charge for the yacht and then the options."(Id.at 139:9-13).According to defendant, "Hylas custom built and spent over a year designing the Yacht with its various personnel, ... [and] produced a set of design diagrams for the [plaintiffs]."(JachneyAff., ¶ 38)(emphasis omitted).
Plaintiffs made the first deposit payment required by the Sales Agreement to Hylas on December 18, 2015.(56.1, ¶ 7).Hylas did not use those funds for the Yacht, and instead used the funds "for general corporate purposes at or around the time the money was received."(Id. , ¶ 11).
Immediately prior to the plaintiffs’ first deposit, the balance of the Hylas operating account was two thousand three hundred two dollars and seventy-six cents ($2,302.76).(56.1, ¶ 74).Immediately after that deposit was received, Hylas wired out sixty-three thousand five hundred dollars ($63,500.00) to "Cross Chartering NV Antwerp/ING Belgium."(Coughlan Decl., Ex. X atNGB0029).By December 22, 2015, the account had a negative balance.(56.1, ¶ 76).However, at the end of that month, the account had a balance of eight hundred eighty-one thousand sixty-five dollars and twenty-two cents ($881,065.22).(Coughlan Decl., Ex. X atNGB0029-30).
In or about March 2016, plaintiffs discussed adding a carbon fiber rig to the Yacht with Hylas.(56.1, ¶ 14).On March 9, 2016, defendant sent Robert an email stating, in part:
...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

Start Your 7-day Trial
-
Bartosiewicz v. Nelsen
...a party to enter a contract are not actionable as fraud ... unless they are collateral to the contract induced." Coughlan v. Jachney , 473 F. Supp. 3d 166, 193 (E.D.N.Y. 2020) (quotation marks omitted) (quoting Spinelli v. Nat'l Football League , 903 F.3d 185, 209 (2d Cir. 2018) ). "A fraud......
-
McKie v. Estate of Dickinson
... ... proves his or her right to it does not constitute a ... conversion.” Coughlan v. Jachney , 473 ... F.Supp.3d 166, 201 (E.D.N.Y. 2020) (quoting Green ... Complex, Inc. v. Smith , 968 N.Y.S.2d 128, 131 (2d ... ...
-
Bartosiewicz v. Nelsen, 6:20-CV-06513 EAW
...a party to enter a contract are not actionable as fraud . . . unless they are collateral to the contract induced.” Coughlan v. Jachney, 473 F.Supp.3d 166, 193 (E.D.N.Y. 2020) (quotation marks omitted) (quoting Spinelli v. Nat'l Football League, 903 F.3d 185, 209 (2d Cir. 2018)). “A fraud cl......
-
DeVito v. Neiman
...with the rights of another." LoPresti v. Terwilliger , 126 F.3d 34, 42 (2d Cir. 1997) ; see also, e.g. , Coughlan v. Jachney , 473 F. Supp. 3d 166, 201 (E.D.N.Y. 2020) (same).In essence, the parties dispute whether Biegel's actions in garnishing approximately $14,700 from plaintiff's bank a......