DISPOSITION: Court determined exchange rate of foreign currency for enforcement of foreign judgment.

COUNSEL:  [*1]  Elizabeth M. Bohn, Esq., Jordan Burt, Miami, FL, Attorneys for plaintiff.

Louis G. Adolfsen, Esq., Melito & Adolfsen P.C., New York, NY, Attorneys for defendant Mark Rose.

 

JUDGES: WILLIAM H. PAULEY III, U.S.D.J.

OPINIONBY: WILLIAM H. PAULEY III

OPINION: ORDER

 

WILLIAM H. PAULEY III, District Judge:

 

Plaintiff the Society of Lloyd’s (“Lloyd’s”) and Defendant Mark Rose (“Rose”) stipulated to the validity and enforceability of a 1998 English judgment in favor of Lloyd’s and against Rose. This Court “so ordered” and entered that Stipulation of Settlement on October 16, 2003. While the parties agree that the amount presently due Lloyd’s under the Stipulation is £ 355,513.04, they disagree regarding the exchange rate to convert the judgment from British Pounds to U.S. Dollars.

 

This Court has reviewed the parties’ letter submissions concerning the exchange rate to be applied. The Stipulation established that the English judgment was “in the amount of UK £ 327,598.60 (U.S. $ 543,702.37),” which represents an exchange rate of 1.65. Thus, the parties demonstrated their mutual understanding that the exchange rate recited in the Equitas contract (1.51) does not govern the English judgment,  [*2]  nor does the contract suggest that it should.

 

Despite similar actions involving Lloyd’s and other Names in which the exchange rate issue has been resolved against Lloyd’s, this action presents the issue under New York law. See Vishipco Line v. Chase Manhattan Bank, N.A., 660 F.2d 854, 865 (2d Cir. 1981) (“As a federal court sitting in diversity, we must apply the currency-conversion rule employed by the courts of New York.”). That question has not been resolved in other lawsuits. New York Judiciary Law § 27(b) directs that when a court enters a judgment or decree in a foreign currency, the applicable exchange rate is that “prevailing on the date of entry of the judgment or decree.”

 

This Court “so ordered” the parties’ Stipulation concerning the validity of the English judgment on October 16, 2003. Therefore, the exchange rate governing the amount due Lloyd’s by Rose is the rate of exchange prevailing on October 16, 2003. Lloyd’s is stayed from taking any action with respect to the letter of credit obtained by Rose until August 19, 2004.

 

Dated: August 9, 2004

New York, New York

 

SO ORDERED:

WILLIAM H. PAULEY III

U.S.D.J.