We Defend you Against

American Express

American Express enforces lawsuits in New York as "American Express National Bank" and "American Express Centurion Bank." The Langel Firm opposes American Express in consumer-debt cases and in some business-debt cases. American Express is an aggressive collection litigant, and in New York, often represents itself ("American Express Legal"), or is represented by Zwicker & Associates, P.C. and Relin, Goldstein & Crane, LLP.

American Express Legal is located at American Express Tower, World Financial Center, 200 Vesey Street, 22nd Floor, New York, NY 10285.

Contact us by calling (888) 271-7109 or by completing this form.

American Express Lawsuit: Court Rejects Consumer's Attempt to Dismiss Complaint and Counterclaims

In the case of American Express v.Teitelbaum, the court denied Teitelbaum's motion for summary judgment to dismiss American Express' complaint and grant judgment on Teitelbaum's counterclaims. The court found that Teitelbaum failed to demonstrate the absence of material facts and did not establish a prima facie case that he did not breach the agreement or account stated with American Express.

6 Key Points from American Express v. Teitelbaum:

1. American Express filed a complaint against Teitelbaum, alleging breach of contract, account stated, and unjust enrichment.
2. Teitelbaum filed a motion for summary judgment to dismiss American Express' complaint and grant judgment on his counterclaims.
3. The court denied Teitelbaum's motion, stating that he did not provide sufficient evidence to support his arguments and failed to show that there were no material facts in dispute regarding the breach of contract or account stated claims made by American Express.
4. In denying American Express's cross-motion for summary judgment, the affirmation of American Express' counsel lacked personal knowledge of the transactions alleged in the complaint, making it insufficient as evidence.
5. Richard Kier's affidavit did not demonstrate personal knowledge of American Express' business practices, failing to meet the foundation requirements for admission of the annexed card agreements and statements as business records.
6. American Express did not provide sufficient evidence to support their claims or dismiss the counterclaims.

Case citation: American Express Centurion Bank and American Express Bank, FSB v. Menashe Teitelbaum, Individually and d/b/a Ace Party Chair/RNTL and Ace Party Chair/RNTL, No. 25611/11, Aug. 14, 2012.

Understanding New York CPLR Rule 4518: Admissibility of Business Records as Evidence

Statute: Rule 4518 of the New York Civil Practice Law and Rules (CPLR) governs the admissibility of business records in evidence.

Purpose: The purpose of Rule 4518 is to establish the admissibility of business records as evidence in legal proceedings. It allows for the introduction of records, whether in the form of written entries or electronic records, that were made in the regular course of business and within a reasonable time of the act, transaction, occurrence, or event in question.

Core elements of the statute:

1. Admissibility of Business Records: Any writing or record, including electronic records, made in the regular course of business is admissible as evidence if it relates to an act, transaction, occurrence, or event.
2. Foundation Requirements: The records must be made within a reasonable time of the event and must reflect routine business activity. Lack of personal knowledge by the maker of the record does not affect its admissibility but may impact its weight.
3. Hospital Bills: Hospital bills can be admitted as evidence if they bear a certification by the head of the hospital or a responsible employee, stating that the bill is correct, the items were necessary, and the charges are reasonable.
4. Other Records: Various other records, such as those related to hospital records, genetic marker or DNA tests, and support payments, can also be admitted as evidence if they meet specific certification requirements.
5. Pregnancy and Childbirth Costs: Hospital bills or records related to the costs of pregnancy or childbirth in paternity proceedings can be admitted as evidence if they are certified by authorized personnel.

Overall, Rule 4518 establishes the criteria for admitting business records and related documents as evidence, ensuring their reliability and relevance in legal proceedings.

Lack of Concrete Injury Leads to Dismissal of Fair Debt Collection Practices Act Case Against AMEX's Process server.

In a memorandum and order, United States District Judge LaSHANN DeARCY HALL granted the motion to dismiss filed by ProVest Defendants in a Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) case brought by Anthony Gentile against various defendants, including ProVest, American Express, and their associates. The court concluded that Gentile failed to sufficiently allege a concrete injury-in-fact, which is a requirement for standing in federal courts. As a result, the ProVest Defendants' motion to dismiss the complaint is granted.

2 Key Points:

1. The ProVest Defendants moved to dismiss the complaint, arguing that Gentile failed to sufficiently allege a concrete injury-in-fact, which is necessary for standing.
2. The court agrees with the ProVest Defendants, stating that Gentile's allegations of intangible harm and lost opportunities do not raise the specter of concrete harm and fail to satisfy the injury-in-fact requirement for standing.

Case Citation: American Express Co., American Express National Bank, Zwicker & Associates, P.C., ProVest, LLC, Feisal Abderahman, Letisha Noel, Esq., and Jason P. Verhagen, Esq., Defendants, 21-CV-7210 (LDH), Signed June 27, 2023.

Also, see Revisiting Amex v. Badalamenti: A Decade Later, Electronic Evidence Under the Microscope.

​

If you need help, call us at (888) 271-7109, or complete this form.