UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
January 23, 2012
NANSI NELSON, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS EXECUTRIX OF THE ESTATE OF ROBERT H. NIELSON, PLAINTIFF,
ULSTER COUNTY, NEW YORK; LEWIS KIRSCHNER, ULSTER COUNTY TREASURER; NINA POSTUPACK, ULSTER COUNTY CLERK; WVD 2906209, LLC;
MARK DELACORTE; DANIEL WINN; AND JOSEPH VIVIANNI, DEFENDANTS.
On December 7, 2011, defendant Joseph Vivianni filed a motion for an award of interest, attorney's fees, costs and reimbursement against defendant Ulster County pursuant to a cross-claim asserted by WVD 2906209 LLC ("WVD"). (See Dkt. No. 258; Dkt. No. 78 ¶ 21.) Ulster County countered that Vivianni's motion is meritless because, inter alia, the cross-claim was asserted by only WVD, and in any event, the settlement agreement between WVD and Ulster County precludes Vivianni's motion. (See Dkt. No. 243 at 7; Dkt Nos. 259, 261.) In addition, Ulster County cross-moved for the costs associated with defending this motion and Vivianni's previous motion for fees, which the court denied as premature. (See Dkt. Nos. 235, 237, 252, 259.) Having reviewed the parties' submissions, it is clear Vivianni's claim has no basis in law or fact as the cross-claim was asserted by WVD, and was thereafter settled by it. (See Dkt. No. 78 ¶ 21; Dkt. No. 243 at 7.) Moreover, Vivianni conceded that WVD paid the taxes that were subsequently returned by Ulster County. (See Dkt. No. 237 ¶ 2.) And while the court concurs with Ulster County's argument regarding Vivianni's entitlement to costs, it declines, in light of Vivianni's pro se status, to grant Ulster County's cross-motion. (See generally Dkt. Nos. 259, 261, 262.)
ACCORDINGLY, it is hereby
ORDERED that Vivianni's motion and Ulster County's cross motion (Dkt. Nos. 258, 259) are DENIED; and it is further
ORDERED that the Clerk provide a copy of this Summary Order to the parties.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.