The Resource Group International Limited Et Al V Muhammad Ziaullah Khan

Court Listener

Automated Summary

Key Facts

In The Resource Group International Limited et al. v. Chishti, 23 Civ. 01760 (LLS), Defendant Muhammad Ziaullah Khan Chishti successfully moved to amend his Counterclaim pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 15(a)(2) and 20. The motion was granted, allowing Chishti to add two new defendants and bring the operative arbitration demand before the Court. The underlying case involves an arbitration pending before Judge James C. Francis IV (JAMS Ref. No. 5425000957), where Plaintiffs initiated litigation on March 1, 2023, alleging Chishti's arbitration claims are barred by a January 10, 2022 Release Agreement. Judge Francis instructed Chishti to move by August 29, 2025 for a determination regarding which claims survive the Release Agreement. Additionally, Chishti's motion to disqualify Cleary Gottlieb as counsel for plaintiffs was denied.

Issues

  • Mr. Chishti moved to disqualify Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP as counsel for plaintiffs, but the claim that Cleary Gottlieb should be disqualified as conflicted lacks support and is denied.
  • The Court granted Defendant Muhammad Ziaullah Khan Chishti's motion to amend his Counterclaim pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 15(a)(2) and 20, allowing him to add two new defendants and bring the operative arbitration demand before this Court. Plaintiffs consented to the proposed Amended Counterclaim as both sides recognized it was necessary to bring the operative arbitration demand before the Court. The amendment will promote efficiency, judicial economy, and alignment, particularly since GEM-II, a respondent in the Arbitration, has refused to intervene as a Plaintiff in this litigation.
  • The Court ordered parties to move for determination regarding whether Mr. Chishti's claims in the Second Amended Demand for Arbitration survive the Release Agreement. Plaintiffs filed a motion on September 29, 2025, and parties were asked to complete responsive submissions by October 20, 2025. Judge Francis had instructed Mr. Chishti to bring these issues before the Court no later than August 29, 2025, for a determination regarding which of his claims in the Second Amended Demand for Arbitration survive the Release Agreement.

Holdings

The Court granted Defendant Muhammad Ziaullah Khan Chishti's motion to amend his Counterclaim pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 15(a)(2) and 20, allowing him to add two new defendants and bring the operative arbitration demand before the Court. The Court also denied the motion to disqualify Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP as counsel for plaintiffs. The parties were ordered to complete submissions by October 20, 2025 regarding whether Mr. Chishti's claims in the Second Amended Demand for Arbitration survive the Release Agreement.

Remedies

The Court granted Defendant Muhammad Ziaullah Khan Chishti's motion to amend his Counterclaim pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 15(a)(2) and 20. The applications were granted, allowing the addition of two new defendants and bringing the operative arbitration demand before the Court. Plaintiffs consented to the proposed Amended Counterclaim.

Legal Principles

  • The court addresses Mr. Chishti's motion for leave to amend his Counterclaim pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2) and 20 to add new defendants and bring the operative arbitration demand before the Court. The court notes that courts in the Southern District of New York liberally grant leave to amend and to join additional parties to promote judicial economy. The amendment is necessary to avoid multiple litigations and comply with Judge Francis's order regarding the Release Agreement and GEM-II.
  • The court discusses a preliminary injunction that Plaintiffs sought to enjoin the Arbitration, which was denied. The Second Circuit later instructed the Court to determine the scope of the Release Agreement to consider which claims are arbitrable. Judge Francis stayed the Arbitration pending this Court's determination of arbitrability of Mr. Chishti's claims in light of the Release Agreement.

Precedent Name

  • Foman v. Davis
  • Shi Ming Chen v. Hunan Manor Enter., Inc.
  • Texwood Ltd. v. Gerber
  • Viada v. Osaka Health Spa, Inc.

Cited Statute

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure

Judge Name

  • Honorable Louis L. Stanton, U.S.D.J.
  • Judge Francis IV who issued orders on the arbitration matter

Passage Text

  • Courts in the Southern District of New York liberally grant such leave, 'freely giving [it] when justice so requires,' as '[l]iberal amendment[s] promote[] judicial economy by making it possible to dispose of all contentions between parties in one lawsuit.'
  • Mr. Chishti's sloppy and irresponsibly careless practices by fits and starts are unacceptable.
  • Defendant Muhammad Ziaullah Khan Chishti moves to amend his Counterclaim pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 15(a)(2) and 20 by adding two new defendants and bringing the operative arbitration demand before this Court. (Dkt. No. 167). Those applications are granted.