BNA ASSOCIATES LLC v. GOLDMAN SACHS SPECIALTY LENDING GROUP, L.P. - Articles

All Content

BNA ASSOCIATES LLC v. GOLDMAN SACHS SPECIALTY LENDING GROUP, L.P.

Posted by: Karen Belcher on Mar 29, 2023

Court: 6th Circuit Court (Published Opinions)

Attorneys 1: ARGUED: Paul J. Krog, BULSO PLC, Brentwood, Tennessee, for Appellant.

Attorneys 2: ARGUED: David R. Fine, K&L GATES LLP, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, for Appellee.

Attorneys 3: ON BRIEF: Paul J. Krog, Eric W. Smith, BULSO PLC, Brentwood, Tennessee, for Appellant.

Attorneys 4: ON BRIEF: David R. Fine, K&L GATES LLP, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, Jason W. Callen, Charles I. Malone, K&L GATES LLP, Nashville, Tennessee, for Appellee.

Judge(s): READLER, MURPHY, and MATHIS, Circuit Judges

Court Appealed: United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee at Nashville

CHAD A. READLER, Circuit Judge. Ruby Tuesday, a restaurant proprietor, leased property in Maryville, Tennessee to support its corporate operations. The company thought it had said goodbye to the property when it agreed to transfer its interest to BNA Associates, a real estate developer. But a new day brought a new development. As a debtor to Goldman Sachs, Ruby Tuesday, per the parties’ credit agreement, was required to get Goldman’s consent before transferring any property subject to the agreement. And when Goldman refused to consent, Ruby Tuesday and BNA missed out on closing their deal. Unable to put its name on the property, BNA sued Goldman, alleging intentional interference with business relations under Tennessee law. The district court dismissed BNA’s complaint. We affirm.

Attachments: