St. Louis Record

Friday, September 20, 2019

Court denies motion for summary judgment relating to $1.6 million jury verdict against Hanzada

Lawsuits

By Marian Johns | Mar 19, 2019


ST. JOSEPH – A federal court has denied a motion for summary judgment to a man who sought $680,046 in relation to a breach of contract case over the sale of beef.

"Because there is a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether (National Beef Packing Co.) held money or credits belonging and due absolutely to Hanzada, the court denies (plaintiff Hassanin) Aly’s motion," Judge Greg Kays of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri, St. Joseph Division wrote in the March 8 order.

According to the court filing in Hassanin Aly v. Hanzada for Import & Export Co. LTD., v. National Beef Packing Co. LLC, Aly was seeking to "satisfy" part of the judgment by garnishing payments Hanzada made to National Beef Packing Co. for beef product distribution to Egypt that the plaintiff had help to facilitate. A jury had awarded $1.6 million against Hanzada for Import & Export Co. LTD in a breach of contract case in April 2016.

The court filing states that in October 2015, National Beef made a transition and began selling beef to ESCO International Trading rather than to Hanzada. However, Hanzada had transferred $310,000 plus $370,000 to National Beef in August 2015. On Aug. 12, 2015, National Beef debited Hanzada's account for $680,046.50 and credited it to ESCO's account and shipped products to the company despite previously showing Hanzada had a credit for the same amount in its account. Aly had filed a writ of garnishment against National Beef just two days before National Beef debited Hanzada's account, according to the order. 

National Beef claimed "it possessed no garnishable property" and that Hanzada's payments were made on ESCO's behalf. Aly then asked the court to find the payments garnishable, which was denied prior to seeking a summary judgment for $680,046.50. 

Kays wrote that "summary judgment is appropriate when the movant shows that 'there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.' ... 'A dispute is genuine if the evidence is such that it could cause a reasonable jury to return a verdict for either party; a fact is material if its resolution affects the outcome of the case.'” 

Kays concluded that "it cannot conclude as a matter of law that Hanzada - and therefore Aly - had an absolute right to the $680,046.50."

Want to get notified whenever we write about U.S. District Court of the Western District of Missouri St. Joseph Division ?

Sign-up Next time we write about U.S. District Court of the Western District of Missouri St. Joseph Division, we'll email you a link to the story. You may edit your settings or unsubscribe at any time.

Organizations in this Story

U.S. District Court of the Western District of Missouri St. Joseph Division

More News