· 10/8/2019

Alpha Beta Capital Partners, L.P. v. Pursuit Investment Management, LLC

Citations

  • 193 Conn. App. 381

Syllabus

The plaintiff company sought to recover damages from the defendants for, inter alia, breach of contract for their failure to remit to the plaintiff its proportionate share of certain proceeds secured by a settlement agreement. The defendants S and C are individuals who, together, formed, operated, and controlled the defendant companies, O Co., F Co., C Co., M Co., P Co., I Co. and N Co. In approximately 2007, the plaintiff invested in both O Co. and C Co. and, as a result, acquired limited partnership interests in those companies. In 2007, F Co. and M Co. had purchased certain securities known as collateralized debt obligations from U Co. and, in 2008, after the value of the collateralized debt obligations precipitously dropped, P Co. and I Co. commenced a civil action alleging fraud against U Co. In April, 2009, the plaintiff executed a limited partnership agreement for C Co., which contained certain provisions for withdrawals by and distributions to limited part- ners. In September, 2009, the plaintiff redeemed its investment in O Co., which extinguished its interest in that company except for certain holdbacks to indemnify potential future expenses of O Co. In 2010, the plaintiff commenced a civil action in the Supreme Court of the state of New York against I Co., S, and C, and filed a separate arbitration proceed- ing against O Co. and C Co. In April, 2011, the plaintiff, I Co., S, C, O Co., C Co., and A Co., the former general partner of C Co., executed a confidential settlement agreement to resolve the 2010 New York action and the arbitration proceeding. As consideration for the plaintiff's with- drawal and release, § 3 of the settlement agreement required I Co. to pay the plaintiff a settlement payment, as well as a redemption payment, which represented the plaintiff's pro rata share, approximately 32.083612 percent, of the net asset value in C Co. as of February 28, 2011, minus a holdback of $250,000 for the purpose of funding costs associated with the ongoi

Judges: Lavine; Bright; Bishop

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.