Majority
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Eileen Bransten, J.), entered October 7, 2015, in favor of plaintiff, unanimously affirmed, with costs. Appeal from order, same court and Justice, entered September 29, 2015, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as subsumed in the appeal from the judgment.
Plaintiff established prima facie that the transaction that
In opposition, defendant failed to raise an issue of fact. Nothing in the Engagement Letter excludes the application of the tail fee provision to Deutsche Bank simply because Deutsche Bank purchased the instruments initially as an underwriter for later sale to end investors (see Riverside S. Planning Corp. v CRP/Extell Riverside, L.P., 13 NY3d 398 , 403-404 [2009]). Moreover, the record demonstrates that the instruments were sold to Deutsche Bank and that Deutsche Bank, BlueMountain Capital Management, LLC, and KKR & Co. L.P. were “Prospective Investors” under the Engagement Letter.
We have considered defendant’s remaining contentions and find them unavailing.
Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Friedman, Acosta, Andrias and Moskowitz, JJ.
Cases cited
- Riverside South Planning Corp. v. CRP/Extell Riverside, L.P. 13 NY3d 398 at 403-404 p. 498