TORTS — FRAUD
36-7-0985 Swift v. Pandey, Dist. Ct. (Linares, U.S.D.J.) (10 pp.) Plaintiff alleges that he purchased all the right, title, and interest to all assets of Xechem International, Inc. and Xechem, Inc. at auction. This action stems from the alleged wrongful conduct of the Defendants in connection with Xechem and Xechem India. Plaintiff’s Complaint asserts twelve causes of action. Defendants Ramesh Pandey and Bhuwan Pandey filed a motion to dismiss. Defendants argue that Plaintiff lacks standing to pursue its conversion and fraud claims because “the purported assignment of them from Xechem’s bankruptcy trustee to Swift was void as against New Jersey’s public policy.” All parties agree that New Jersey law applies to Plaintiff’s tort claims. Plaintiff does not dispute that he asserts the tort claims of fraud and conversion only as an assignee of Xechem’s right, title and interest. Thus, Plaintiff has failed to state a claim of conversion or fraud that is plausible on its face where, under New Jersey law, causes of action arising out of tort are not assignable prior to judgment. As amendment would be futile, Plaintiff’s fraud and conversion are dismissed with prejudice. Plaintiff’s remaining claims are dismissed without prejudice where they fail to meet the requirements of Rule 8(a); these claims do not put the Defendant(s) on notice of the basis of the allegations against them. [Filed July 1, 2013]
