- 7 -
final judgment. Klinghoffer v. S.N.C. Achille Lauro, 921 F.2d
21, 24-25 (2d Cir. 1990). Additionally, the U.S. Court of
Appeals for the Second Circuit has urged the courts to exercise
great care in certifying interlocutory orders. Westwood Pharms.,
Inc. v. Natl. Fuel Gas Distrib. Corp., 964 F.2d 85, 89 (2d Cir.
1992).
In our Memorandum Opinion, we noted that the determination
of whether there was a meeting of the minds sufficient to
constitute a contract is a question of fact. Accordingly, a
controlling question of law is not involved. See Kovens v.
Commissioner, supra at 79-80.
The estate contends that “this case was unique and unlike
any other case the Court has considered on the issue whether an
otherwise agreed basis of settlement should be enforced.”
Assuming arguendo this is true, it strains credibility to then
suggest that substantial grounds for difference of opinion are
present.
The estate also argues that if the estate’s motion for entry
of decision were granted, it would terminate the litigation in
this case. The estate, however, ignores the possibility that on
appeal the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit also may
rule against the estate (i.e., that there was no settlement). If
we were affirmed, this case would not terminate at that point
because the fair market value of the limited partnership interest
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011