NovaFund Advisors, LLC v. Capitala Group, LLC
Plaintiff: NovaFund Advisors, LLC
Defendant: Capitala Group, LLC
Case Number: 3:2018cv01023
Filed: June 15, 2018
Court: US District Court for the District of Connecticut
Office: New Haven Office
County: Fairfield
Presiding Judge: Michael P. Shea
Nature of Suit: Other Contract
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
RSS Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
March 3, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 366 ORDER. For the reasons stated in the attached, the 327 motion for summary judgment is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. In addition, the 329 motion to seal Exhibit X is DENIED without prejudice and the Clerk is directed to unseal ECF No . 330. While the Defendants incorporate StepStone's arguments in its previous motion to seal, see ECF No. 168, those arguments are specific to StepStone's Investment Memorandum. Specifically, StepStone argued that if the Investment M emorandum was made publicly available, then other private markets investment managers would have a "window into how StepStone and Swiss Capital evaluate [them], which could allow them to skew the process in their favor when trying to gain busine ss from clients of StepStone or Swiss Capital." ECF No. 168 at 6. The investment agreements in Exhibit X, however, are different from the Investment Memorandum, and the Defendants do not argue that the investment agreements would offer the same "window" into StepStone's process. Defendants argue only that the exhibit "contain[s] confidential and competitive information concerning a non-party" and that the exhibit is designated as "Attorneys' Eyes Only.&qu ot; But this is insufficient to satisfy the Second Circuit's standard for sealing documents filed on the public docket. Because of the common law and First Amendment rights of access to judicial documents, such documents may be sealed only upo n "particularized findings demonstrating that sealing is supported by clear and compelling reasons and is narrowly tailored to serve those reasons." D. Conn. L.R. 5(e)3. Thus, the Defendants have failed to make a particularized showing supp orting the sealing of exhibit X. If the Defendants wish to maintain exhibit X under seal, they (or StepStone) may file a supplemental memorandum in support of its motion, within 14 days of this order, demonstrating why the sealing of exhibit X comports with the standard described above.I DENY the 357 amended motion to seal and the Clerk is directed to unseal all of the exhibits filed with NovaFund's opposition to the motion for summary judgment, see ECF Nos. 355, 356 . Novafund's motion to seal indicates that it is being filed to fulfill Novafund's obligations under the protective order, and makes no showing that these documents satisfy the strict standard for sealing filings on the public docket that applies in the Second Circuit. Further, more than 150 days have passed since the filing of the motion to seal, and although the motion to seal indicates that other interested parties were notified of its filing, no person has come forward to seek the continued sealing of these documents, let alone made the requisite showing. The 351 motion to seal is DENIED as moot.Signed by Judge Michael P. Shea on 3/3/2022. (Wong, Qing Wai)
August 11, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 339 ORDER. For the reasons set forth in the attached, the (ECF No. 217 ) Motion to Dismiss is DENIED. Signed by Judge Michael P. Shea on 8/11/2021. (Gait, Emily)
May 25, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 290 ORDER granting in part and denying in part 281 Motion to Compel. Signed by Judge Thomas O. Farrish on 5/25/21. (Wood, R.)
January 14, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 101 ORDER. For the reasons set forth in the attached, NovaFund's 70 motion to dismiss Capitala's 56 Counterclaim is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. I grant Capitala leave to replead its fraud claims within 14 days of this Order.< br>Capitala's 67 motion to amend its counterclaims to add Columbus and MD Global is GRANTED. Capitala shall serve its counterclaims on Columbus and MD Global and file proof of service on the docket within 21 days. Capitala also must file a statement within 21 days adequately alleging the citizenship of MD Global. NovaFund's 96 motion to amend its complaint is GRANTED. Signed by Judge Michael P. Shea on 1/14/2020. (Hausmann, Amy)
March 31, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 58 ORDER. For reasons set forth in the attached, NovaFund's 15 motion for prejudgment remedy is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. NovaFund is entitled to a prejudgment remedy in the amount of $250,000. In light of this resolution, NovaFund 's 19 motion for disclosure of assets is also GRANTED, but stayed for the time being. The prejudgment remedy statute further contemplates that, "if the court finds that the application for the prejudgment remedy should be granted," a s it has here, the Court should consider "whether the plaintiff should be required to post a bond to secure the defendant against damages that may result from the prejudgment remedy or whether the defendant should be allowed to substitute a bond for the prejudgment remedy." Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-278d(a)(4). Because neither party was prepared to address these issues at the hearing, the Court hereby orders that the parties shall confer, either in person or by telephone, to resolve t he issue of whether NovaFund, Capitala, or neither will post a bond. If they are unable to agree, the parties shall simultaneously file briefs of no more than 8 pages addressing only the bond issues within 14 days of this order.Signed by Judge Michael P. Shea on 3/31/2019. (Barclay, Michael)
March 13, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 45 ORDER. Defendant's 24 motion to dismiss is DENIED for the reasons set forth in the attached. In light of this disposition, discovery shall commence immediately and the parties shall file a revised Local Rule 26(f) report within 7 days.Signed by Judge Michael P. Shea on 3/13/2019. (Barclay, Michael)
Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the Connecticut District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: NovaFund Advisors, LLC v. Capitala Group, LLC
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: NovaFund Advisors, LLC
Represented By: Alison P. Baker
Represented By: Jill M. O&#039;Toole
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Capitala Group, LLC
Represented By: Frank F. Coulom, Jr.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?