Investment company YA II PN wins $500,000 claim against binary options firm EZTD
Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald of the New York Southern District Court granted a judgement by default in favor of YA II PN, Ltd. against EZTD Inc. in the amount of $ 547,123.
YA II PN, Ltd., a Cayman Islands exempted company, has won its case against binary options firm EZTD Inc. at the New York Southern District Court.
On March 1, 2018, Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald signed an Order for a Judgement by Default in favor of YA II PN, Ltd. against EZTD Inc. in the amount of $ 547,123. The Order was issued after the defendant, EZTD Inc. had failed to plead or otherwise defend in this action. Let’s recall that on February 13, 2018, the plaintiffs in the case filed their Motion for Default Judgement against the binary options firm pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 55(b)(1) and Local Civil Rule 55.2(a) on the grounds that said Defendant failed to answer or otherwise defend against the Complaint.
The action, captioned YA II PN, Ltd. v. EZTD Inc. (1:17-cv-03455), started in May 2017, with a substantial amount of time and effort spent on trying to serve the summons to the Defendant. After several extensions of the time to serve the summons, they finally got accepted in October 2017. No answer to the complaint has followed, however.
The complaint refers to events from November 2016, when YA and EZTD entered into a Purchase Agreement pursuant to which YA invested in a Promissory Note which it acquired thereunder. Under the Purchase Agreement, the company issued to YA a promissory note in an aggregate principal amount of $500,000.
EZTD’s first payment to YA on the Promissory Note was due on February 1, 2017. EZTD failed to make that payment and has continued to fail to make any payment on the subsequent Payment Due Dates of March 1, April 1 and May 1, 2017. As a result of EZTD’s failure to respond or otherwise pay the outstanding amounts due, YA launched the action in order to collect the sums due to it.
YA II PN accused EZTD of breach of contract and unjust enrichment.
On Thursday, March 1, 2018, the case was terminated.