Skip to main content


Reset A A Font size: Print

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

Dale M. COUDERT, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Richard N. HOKIN, Defendant-Appellee.1


Decided: March 29, 2019

Present: ROSEMARY S. POOLER, DENNY CHIN, Circuit Judges. ERIC N. VITALIANO, District Judge.  2 Appearing for Appellant: Robert B. Bernstein, Bernstein & Associates, PLLC, Scarsdale, NY. Appearing for Appellee: Phillip C. Landrigan, Cohen, LaBarbera & Landrigan, LLP, Chester, NY.


Dale Coudert appeals from the April 30, 2018 final order of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Carter, J.) granting Richard N. Hokin judgment on a promissory note dated December 31, 2008, in the amount of $2,731,066.12, plus interest thereon, for a total judgment of $4,770,461.69. Coudert v. Hokin, 12-CV-0110 (ALC), 2018 WL 4278333 (S.D.N.Y. April 30, 2018). We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts, procedural history, and specification of issues for review.

For the first time on appeal, Coudert argues that the promissory note at issue is not enforceable, either for lack of consideration or as violative of the statute of frauds. We decline to consider these arguments on appeal. Bogle–Assegai v. Connecticut, 470 F.3d 498, 504 (2d Cir. 2006) (“[I]t is a well-established general rule that an appellate court will not consider an issue raised for the first time on appeal.” (alteration in original) (internal quotation marks omitted) ).

We have considered the remainder of Coudert’s arguments and find them to be without merit. Accordingly, the order of the district court hereby is AFFIRMED.

Copied to clipboard