Indymac Venture, LLC v Leu Okuda & Doi

Justia Dockets & Filings Ninth Circuit Hawaii District Court Indymac Venture, LLC v Leu Okuda & Doi

Indymac Venture, LLC v Leu Okuda & Doi

Plaintiff:	Indymac Venture, LLC
Defendant:	Leu Okuda & Doi, Attorneys At Law
Case Number:	1:2014cv00263
Filed:	June 6, 2014
Court:	US District Court for the District of Hawaii
Office:	Hawaii Office
County:	Honolulu
Presiding Judge:	BARRY M. KURREN
Nature of Suit:	Contract: Other
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity - Legal Malpractice
Jury Demanded By:	None

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
February 23, 2015	Filing 48 ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION re 38 - Signed by Judge BARRY M. KURREN on 2/23/2015. (emt, )CERTIFICATE OF SERVICEParticipants registered to receive electronic notifications received this document electronically at the e-mail address listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF). Participants not registered to receive electronic notifications were served by first class mail on the date of this docket entry
December 19, 2014	Filing 35 ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS COMPLAINT AND PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON LIABILITY re 9 , 15 - Signed by Judge BARRY M. KURREN on 12/19/2014. (emt, )CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE< /center>Participants registered to receive electronic notifications received this document electronically at the e-mail address listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF). Participants not registered to receive electronic notifications were served by first class mail on the date of this docket entry

Date Filed

Document Text

February 23, 2015

Filing 48 ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION re 38 - Signed by Judge BARRY M. KURREN on 2/23/2015. (emt, )CERTIFICATE OF SERVICEParticipants registered to receive electronic notifications received this document electronically at the e-mail address listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF). Participants not registered to receive electronic notifications were served by first class mail on the date of this docket entry

December 19, 2014

Filing 35 ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS COMPLAINT AND PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON LIABILITY re 9 , 15 - Signed by Judge BARRY M. KURREN on 12/19/2014. (emt, )CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE< /center>Participants registered to receive electronic notifications received this document electronically at the e-mail address listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF). Participants not registered to receive electronic notifications were served by first class mail on the date of this docket entry

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 Hawaii District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Indymac Venture, LLC v Leu Okuda & Doi
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: Indymac Venture, LLC
Represented By:	Paul Alston
Represented By:	William S. Hunt
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: Leu Okuda & Doi, Attorneys At Law
Represented By:	John S. Nishimoto
Represented By:	Diane W. Wong
Represented By:	Calvin E. Young
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?