Lehman brothers liquidating who is dale earnhard jr dating

However, it concluded that because the .7 million paid to Hoffman for his 2007 bonus was outside the scope of the obligations delegated to Barclays under the APA, Hoffman could pursue a .7 million claim in the bankruptcy.

The district court affirmed in part and reversed in part.

Both individuals eventually accepted, and began working at Barclays in the fall of 2008.

This factual finding is supported by the record -- including testimony by appellants and several other witnesses, numerous exhibits, and contract negotiations surreptitiously recorded by Hoffman. It is undisputed that Barclays paid the million and 0,000 that LBI owed Hoffman and Judkins, respectively. ․ If the delegate fails to perform, the delegant remains liable.”); Headrick v. Judkins contends that Barclays was required to pay additional sums orally promised by his LBI managers.

The entire payment to Judkins and all but .7 million of the payment to Hoffman were “08 Annual Bonuses” made to “Transferred Employees,” App'x at 1488, and so were obligations delegated to Barclays under the APA. Rockwell Int'l Corp., 24 F.3d 1272, 1278 (10th Cir. This argument fails because LBI's bonus policy made clear that employees had no entitlement to bonuses unless guaranteed in writing. Hoffman asserts that LBI should be judicially estopped from arguing that Barclays satisfied LBI's 2008 bonus obligation to him because LBHI took a contrary position in prior litigation. HSBC Bank USA, Nat'l Ass'n (In re Adelphia Recovery Tr.), 634 F.3d 678, 695-96 (2d Cir.

We assume the parties' familiarity with the underlying facts, the procedural history, and the issues presented for review.

(“LBI”) -- Jonathan Hoffman (through his entity 1EE LLC) and Wayne Judkins -- appeal from the judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Schofield, J.), which affirmed that part of the order of the Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York (Chapman, J.) disallowing Judkins's claim and most of Hoffman's claim and which reversed that part of the order allowing a portion of Hoffman's claim.