The opinion of the court was delivered by: Denise Cote, District Judge
Plaintiff David Norkin ("Norkin") brought this action in New York State Supreme Court against DLA Piper Rudnick Gray Cary, LLP ("Piper"), the lawfirm that he claims represented both him and Britestarr Homes, Inc. ("Britestarr"), a company he owned and managed. Norkin alleges that Piper committed professional malpractice and breached its fiduciary duty to him and Britestarr by operating under an undisclosed conflict of interest when it (1) provided him with advice in connection with his personal bankruptcy proceeding, and (2) recommended that Britestarr file for bankruptcy and that Norkin resign as its president. Piper removed the action to this Court on the ground that it is related to Norkin's and Britestarr's bankruptcy proceedings.
Plaintiff now moves to remand the action to state court. Defendant opposes this motion and moves instead to transfer the matter to the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut. Defendant also moves to dismiss the complaint, or alternatively, for summary judgment. For the following reasons, plaintiff's motion to remand is denied; defendant's motion to transfer is granted; and defendant's motion to dismiss or alternatively, for summary judgment, is transferred to the District of Connecticut.
The following facts are taken from the complaint or are undisputed, except where otherwise noted. From 1983 until May 2002, Norkin was the president of Britestarr. Norkin was initially Britestarr's sole beneficial shareholder. At some point after Britestarr's formation, but before the events that are the subject of this action, Norkin transferred record ownership of the Britestarr stock to his then wife, Friema Norkin.
In September 1988, Britestarr took out a loan from Lloyds Bank ("Lloyds"), which was secured by Friema Norkin's pledge of the Britestarr shares. Britestarr used the Lloyds loan to purchase a 28-acre property in Bronx, New York (the "property"), which Norkin describes as "ideally suited to serve as home to a large power plant." In or about 1990, the Norkins divorced, and Friema Norkin conveyed her interest in the Britestarr shares back to Norkin, pursuant to their separation agreement and divorce decree. Lloyds, however, retained possession of the share certificates. In 1997, Norkin filed for bankruptcy protection in United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Connecticut and listed the Britestarr shares as an asset of his estate.
In 1998, ABB Equity Ventures ("ABB") began negotiations with Britestarr to purchase the property and develop a power plant on it. On December 31, 1998, ABB agreed to pay Britestarr $1.4 million for an exclusive three-year option to purchase the property. If ABB exercised the option, Britestarr could choose to receive $31.4 million in cash immediately, or payments of approximately $225 million over 30 years. In 1999, Norkin retained Piper to assist him and Britestarr in, among other things, "advancing the transaction" so that ABB would exercise its option.*fn1
Britestarr defaulted on the Lloyds loan, and in 2001, ABB purchased Lloyds's rights against Britestarr, including any claims to the Britestarr shares originally pledged by Friema Norkin. ABB filed suit in Norkin's personal bankruptcy proceedings, arguing that Friema Norkin still owned the Britestarr shares. Norkin claims that Piper provided him with advice in his personal capacity regarding the ownership of the shares.
In the spring of 2002, ABB informed Piper that it was willing pay over $1 million to extend the option period. According to Norkin, Piper never advised him or Britestarr of the offer. Between March and May 2002, Piper advised Britestarr to file for bankruptcy and recommended that Norkin resign as the company's president.*fn2 Piper expressed the view that filing for bankruptcy would remove impediments that would otherwise prevent Britestarr from selling the property. Norkin and Britestarr followed Piper's advice. Britestarr's bankruptcy proceeding, originally filed in New York, was transferred to the same Bankruptcy Judge in the District of Connecticut who was handling Norkin's bankruptcy. Britestarr subsequently filed an adversary proceeding against Piper, alleging that "the acts of Norkin along with Piper's assistance and counsel cost Britestarr to loose [sic] a tremendous business opportunity worth potentially hundreds of millions of dollars, and forced Britestarr into ... eventual bankruptcy."*fn3
On May 23, 2002, on the motion of the Internal Revenue Service, the Bankruptcy Court converted Norkin's case from a Chapter 11 case to a Chapter 7 case. The court appointed a Chapter 7 trustee to exercise control over the property of Norkin's estate.
Norkin filed this action in New York State Supreme Court on May 9, 2005. On October 6, 2005, he served defendant with a complaint alleging that Piper breached its fiduciary duty to Norkin and committed professional malpractice in its representation of him. Norkin alleges that Piper was operating under a conflict of interest while it advised him and Britestarr, as it was also serving as counsel for TransGas, a competing power plant project. According to Norkin, Piper stood to earn more in legal fees from the TransGas project than it would from the ABB project.
Norkin requests "not less than" $10 million in compensatory damages and an additional $10 million in exemplary damages. Norkin does not explain how he arrives at the $10 million figure for the damages he allegedly suffered, but he does argue that if he had known of the $1 million offer to extend the option period, he would have (1) been able to settle ABB's claim in his personal bankruptcy over the ownership of the Britestarr shares and would have "remain[ed] as Britestarr's rightful owner and president"; (2) continued to serve as Britestarr's president and collected a salary and benefits; (3) acquired the necessary permits to facilitate ABB's purchase of the property; and (4) been able to keep Britestarr from filing for bankruptcy.
On October 26, 2005, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1334 and 1452 ("Section 1334" and "Section 1452," respectively), Piper removed the action to this Court on the ground that it "arises in or is related to" the federal bankruptcy cases of Norkin and Britestarr. Plaintiff now moves to remand the action to state court. Defendant moves instead to transfer it to the District of ...