Popular Topics
All Topics
- 5 Pointz
- Advertising
- Advertising Law
- affordable housing
- AirBNB Lawsuit
- ALTA
- ALTA ACSM Standards
- Assemblages
- Bloomberg BNA
- Breach
- Broker-LawyerRelationship
- Broker’s license
- Building Loan Soft Costs
- Certified B corporation
- checklist
- Climate Change
- Commercial Condo
- Commercial Lease
- Commercial Tenant Harassment Law
- commerical real estate
- Condo Developers
- condominium
- condos
- Contract
- Copyright, Trademark and Other Intellectual Property
- Corporate Law
- Corporate social responsibility
- Court Decisions
- COVID-19
- Crowdfunding
- Crowdfunding Rules
- CSR
- Delaware corporate law
- Delaware Good Faith
- Delaware Law
- Dodd-Frank Act
- environment, social and governance
- ESG
- event of default
- FinCEN
- foreclosure
- Fraud
- gross negligence
- ground leases
- Inequitable Conduct
- infrastructure
- Insurance Company
- Intellectual Property
- Internal Revenue Code
- internet
- ISLA
- Jennifer Plan
- Job Act Rules
- Joint Venture Agreements
- leasehold condominiums
- Limited Liability
- Limited Partnerships
- LLC
- LLC Agreement
- LLC Agreement Questions
- LLC Checklist
- LLC Mergers
- LLC taxation
- Loan Agreements
- MAE
- Mom and Pop Tenants
- Mortgage Subordination
- mortgages
- New York
- New York Attorney General
- New York City Council
- New York City Surveys
- New York Real Estate Journal
- Non-profit Organization
- NY Attorney General
- NY Real Estate in 2016
- NY Real Estate in 2018
- NYREJ
- NYS Land Surveyors Association
- NYS Lien Law
- Offering Plan
- online database listing
- opportunity zones
- Ordinary Course Covenant
- Passive Investors
- Public benefit corporation
- Public M&A
- Public Policy
- Purchase Contracts
- quality control
- Real Estate
- Real Estate Development Company
- Real Estate Financing Bureau
- Real Estate Litigation
- Real Estate LLC Agreements
- Real Estate Taxes
- Real Property Tax (RPT)
- Real-estate-advertising
- retail lease
- Rights of First Refusal
- ROFRs
- rural areas
- Sales
- Sales Tax
- section 1031 exchanges
- Securities & Exchange Commission
- Sellers
- Sole Discretion
- Specific Disclaimers
- Tax
- tax escalation clause enforcement
- tenancies in common
- TRIA
- VARA
- Visual Artists Rights Act
- Visual Examinations
- “High Volatility” (HVCRE) loans
Recent Posts
- NYREJ Publishes Article by Thomas Kearns on Commercial Lease Clauses for Pandemics
- NYREJ Publishes a Review of 2020 by Thomas Kearns
- NYREJ Publishes Article by Thomas Kearns on the Top 2020 Legal Developments Affecting NY’s CRE Industry
- Delaware Chancery Court Provides Important Guidance on COVID-19’s Impact on a Buyer’s Obligation to Close:
- Infrastructure Needed to Cure Digital Divide in the U.S.
- NYREJ Publishes Article by Thomas Kearns on Foreclosures for Technical Mortgage Defaults
- NYREJ Publishes Article by Thomas Kearns on Hotel Ground Lease Defaults
- NYREJ Publishes Article by Thomas Kearns on Returning to Offices After COVID-19
- NYREJ Publishes Article by Thomas Kearns on Protecting Co-Investors in LLC Agreements
Archives
- March 2021
- February 2021
- December 2020
- October 2020
- August 2020
- June 2020
- April 2020
- March 2020
- January 2020
- December 2019
Contact Us
Thomas D. Kearns
tkearns@olshanlaw.com
@TDKearns
212.451.2273
NYREJ Publishes Article by Thomas Kearns on Gross Negligence
New York Real Estate Journal published an article on July 21 authored by Olshan Real Estate partner Thomas Kearns entitled “’Gross Negligence’ Revisited“
In 2014, I wrote an article for this Journal about typical negotiations over a gross negligence standard in indemnification clauses in management, LLC and other agreements. Under New York law gross negligence is defined as conduct that “evinces a reckless disregard for the rights of others or ‘smacks’ of intentional wrongdoing” or where a party “fails to exercise even slight care.” A key consideration for a business person who is a party to an indemnification agreement is to avoid a fact trial due to the expense and unpredictability of the outcome–the much preferred method is to defeat the claim as a matter of law meaning a judge can decide the matter on motion papers.
In 2019, a fascinating decision in this area was issued by the Appellate Division’s First Department, an intermediate appellate court with jurisdiction over Manhattan. In S.A. DE OBRAS Y SERVICIOS, COPASA v. The BANK OF NOVA SCOTIA the court addressed an error made by the bank in its role as financial advisor to the plaintiff. The plaintiff won a bid to build a toll road in Chile based on a financial model prepared by the bank. After winning the bid, the plaintiff posted a bond that would be forfeited if the winning bidder failed to proceed. The consulting agreement between the plaintiff and the bank provided an exculpatory clause limiting the bank’s liability for negligence to 50% of the eventual success fee. But New York law does not permit exculpatory clauses to vitiate liability for a party’s gross negligence or willful misconduct so the plaintiff needed to prove the bank was grossly negligent to collect over the stated cap on damages.
The financial model the bank prepared for the plaintiff had a huge error–the model reflected tolls being collected from the beginning of the contract with the Chilean agency and not from when the road was predicted to be opened, an $80 million difference. (When I got to this part of the opinion I smacked my head which has happened several times recently, leading me to postulate a new Kearns rule: When the facts of a court opinion or an online video are such that I smack my head, something is very, very bad.) The plaintiff defaulted under the contract to build the road. The plaintiff argued that the bank’s error was so bad that it amounted to gross negligence and that the cap on the damages the bank owed should not be enforced. The lower court judge granted the bank’s motion for summary judgment on the gross negligence claim. The Appellate Division reversed citing the bank’s internal review failure (a review of the model by another senior banker was not performed in violation of the bank’s internal standards), the bank’s termination of a senior employee midway through the project leaving only a junior employee responsible, and the plaintiff’s expert affidavit that the failure to perform an internal audit of the model was “an extreme departure” from industry standards. The court held that whether the mistake constituted gross negligence was for a jury to decide.
Lesson learned: Some innocent mistakes can be so egregious and the results so catastrophic that a court will hold that a jury or other fact finder must hear evidence of all the circumstances to determine whether the erring party was grossly negligent. That’s an expensive and dangerous place to be.
Thomas Kearns is a partner with Olshan Frome Wolosky LLP’s real estate department, New York, N.Y.