Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Unibank for Savings v. 999 Private Jet, LLC

United States District Court, D. Massachusetts

September 12, 2019

UNIBANK FOR SAVINGS, Plaintiff,
v.
999 PRIVATE JET, LLC, ELINA SARGSYAN, & EDGAR SARGSYAN, Defendant. SBK HOLDINGS USA, INC., Intervenor.

          ORDER AND MEMORANDUM ON PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (DOCKET NO. 29)

          TIMOTHY S. HILLMAN DISTRICT JUDGE.

         Plaintiff Unibank for Savings filed this action for breach of, and enforcement of its rights under, a promissory note executed by 999 Private Jet, LLC, (“999 Private Jet”), Edgar Sargsyan (“Mr. Sargsyan”), and Elina Sargsyan. SBK Holdings USA, Inc. (“Intervenor”), moved to intervene. (Docket No. 19). The Court granted the motion, and Intervenor filed a Complaint alleging its ownership of collateral used to enforce Plaintiff's rights under the promissory note. (Docket No. 26, 27).

         Plaintiff moves for summary judgment on Intervenor's claims. (Docket No. 29). Because Intervenor has failed to establish a genuine issue of material fact, Plaintiff's motion is granted.

         Background

         This Court reviews the record in the light most favorable to the party opposing summary judgment. Santiago-Ramos v. Centennial P.R. Wireless Corp., 217 F.3d 46, 50 (1st Cir. 2000).

         From 2013 through July 2016, Mr. Sargsyan was President of, and legal counsel to, Intervenor. (Docket No. 27 at 2). In 2015, without Intervenor's knowledge or consent, Mr. Sargsyan formed Regdalin Aviation (“Regdalin”), of which he was the Managing Member. (Docket No. 27 at 2).

         On November 5, 2015, Mr. Sargsyan purchased a Gulfstream aircraft, Model G IVSP, Serial No. 1315, FAA Registration No. N999SE (the “Aircraft”) with Intervenor's funds and transferred ownership to Regdalin. (Docket No. 27 at 2-3). On February 29, 2016, Mr. Sargsyan refinanced the Aircraft with The Huntington National Bank (“Huntington”). (Docket No. 30 at 1). As part of that refinancing, Regdalin granted, and Huntington perfected, a security interest in the Aircraft. (Docket No. 1).

         Intervenor discovered Mr. Sargsyan's fraud in September 2016. (Docket No. 27 at 3). Intervenor's current Chief Executive Officer, Daniel McDyre (“Mr. McDyre”), contacted the Federal Aviation Administration (“FAA”) by letter to request a lien of $6, 227, 250 on the Aircraft. (Docket No. 33-1 at 2-3). The FAA filed this letter in the Aircraft's Suspense File on December 30, 2016. (Docket No. 33-1 at 2-3). Intervenor also filed a Complaint for Damages in the Los Angeles Superior Court on February 3, 2017. (Docket No. 27 at 3).

         In early 2017, Regdalin sought to refinance the Huntington loan. (Docket No. 30 at 1). As part of the refinancing deal, Regdalin transferred ownership of the Aircraft to 999 Private Jet. (Docket No. 30 at 1-2). Representatives from Unibank allegedly contacted an unspecified employee at SBK in “in April 2017 or May 2017” to request the original logbooks for the Aircraft. (Docket No. 33-5 at 3). Intervenor asserts that, during this call, it informed Plaintiff that 999 Private Jet lacked legitimate title to the Aircraft. (Docket No. 33-1 at 4).

         On May 4, 2017, to satisfy the balance due on the Huntington loan, Plaintiff loaned 999 Private Jet, Mr. Sargsyan, and Elina Sargsyan $4, 348, 334.01, secured by an interest in the Aircraft. (Docket No. 30 at 2). Plaintiff filed a Form 8050 with the FAA to perfect its interest. (Docket No. 30 at 2). At the time, the FAA record for the Aircraft included a forged letter from Intervenor disclaiming all liens on and claims to the Aircraft. (Docket No. 33-1 at 4).

         Beginning in June 2018, 999 Private Jet, Mr. Sargsyan, and Elina Sargsyan failed to make the required monthly loan payments to Plaintiff. (Docket No. 30 at 2). Plaintiff filed this action with the Court on August 7, 2018. (Docket No. 1). On September 7, 2018, the Court granted Plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction and authorized Plaintiff to take possession of the Aircraft. (Docket No. 12). Intervenor moved to intervene on October 31, 2018. (Docket No. 19). The Court granted Intervenor's motion on April 1, 2019. (Docket No. 26). Plaintiff moved for summary judgment on Intervenor's claims on May 9, 2019. (Docket No. 29).

         Legal Standard

         Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56, a court “shall grant summary judgment if the movant shows that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” An issue is “genuine” when a reasonable factfinder could resolve it in favor of the nonmoving party. Morris v. Gov't Dev. Bank of Puerto Rico, 27 F.3d 746, 748 (1st Cir. 1994). A fact is “material” when it may affect the outcome of the suit. Id. When ruling on a motion for summary judgment, “the court must view the facts in the light most favorable to the ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.