We Secured a Case’s Dismissal for No Payment Notwhithstanding We Had Limited Evidence

The debtor was a vertically integrated aviation leasing, maintenance, overhaul, and testing group.

The Defendant, a seasoned company with a 15-year track record, has been a reliable supplier in the fields of commercial, military, and general aviation.

The Plaintiff filed a complaint against the Defendant seeking to clawback $269,157.37 as alleged fraudulent transfers and unjust enrichment.

We successfully proved to the Plaintiff that the Defendant provided reasonably equivalent value in exchange for the transfers even though we had limited evidence due to the Defendant’s issue with its email provider, which caused almost all of its communications and documents with the debtor to be lost.

Our defense strategy effectively countered the Plaintiff’s Unjust Enrichment claim. We argued that a service contract existed between the parties, the payments were made in accordance with the contract, and legal precedent supports our position that a plaintiff cannot pursue unjust enrichment claims if a contract covers the same subject matter.

After asserting our defenses to the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff indicated they would dismiss the complaint for no payment.

(10)