Morningstar Holding Corporation v. G2, LLC et al
Plaintiff: Morningstar Holding Corporation
Defendant: G2, LLC, Henry George and Rich Douglas
Case Number: 1:2010cv00439
Filed: August 27, 2010
Court: US District Court for the District of Idaho
Office: Boise - Southern Office
County: Ada - Southern
Presiding Judge: B. Lynn Winmill
Nature of Suit: Recovery of Overpayment and Enforcement of Judgment
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
March 13, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 168 MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER granting in part and denying in part 163 Motion for Augmentation and Reconsideration; amending 158 Memorandum Decision and Order; granting in part and denying in part 98 Defendant G2's Motion for Summary Jud gment; granting in part and denying in part 96 Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed by Judge B. Lynn Winmill. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by (cjm)
January 31, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 158 MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER denying 88 Motion for Partial Summary Judgment; denying 91 Motion to Dismiss; granting in part and denying in part 96 Motion for Summary Judgment; denying 98 Motion for Summary Judgment; denying 106 Motion for Leave to File Amended Counter-claim; denying 117 Motion to Strike ; granting 129 Motion to Augment the Record; denying 135 Motion to Strike ; granting 145 Motion for Consideration of Late-Filed Affidavit and Amendment to Response to Morningstars State of Facts in Support of Motion for Partial Summary Judgment. Signed by Judge B. Lynn Winmill. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by cjm)
October 4, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 152 ORDER ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER AND PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR DISCOVERY granting 77 Motion for Discovery; denying 82 Motion for Protective Order. Signed by Judge B. Lynn Winmill. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by cjm)
July 29, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 86 ORDER Regarding Defendant's Motion for Protective Order and Plaintiff;s Motion for Discovery, re 77 MOTION for Discovery; 82 MOTION for Protective Order. The parties shall file responses to the pending motions by 8/3/2011. (Evidentiary Hearing set for 8/9/2011 11:00 AM in Boise - Courtroom 3 before Judge B. Lynn Winmill.) Signed by Judge B. Lynn Winmill. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by cjm)
March 10, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 56 MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER granting in part and denying in part 19 Motion to Dismiss; granting in part and denying in part 19 Motion for Summary Judgment. Plaintiff shall have 21 days from the date of this Order to file a Second Amended Compla int. Failure to do so will result in the dismissal of Counts One, Two and Three with prejudice and without further notice. Signed by Judge B. Lynn Winmill. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by cjm)
November 8, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 45 MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER granting in part and denying in part 16 Motion to Remand to State Court. Plaintiff's Motion for Remand is DENIED. Plaintiff's Alternative Motion to Extend Time for Service is GRANTED. Plaintiff shall be permi tted the addtional 60 days from the date of this Order within which to accomplish service upon the remaining individual Defendant. Defendants' request for an award of attorneys' fees is DENIED. The parties shall have 5 days from the date of this Order within which to file written memoranda and authority of their respective position on whether the Court can or should decide the pending 19 Motion to Dismiss while service of the remaining Defendant is outstanding. Signed by Judge B. Lynn Winmill. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by cjm)
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 Idaho District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Morningstar Holding Corporation v. G2, LLC et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: G2, LLC
Represented By: Thomas J Angstman
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: Henry George
Represented By: Thomas J Angstman
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: Rich Douglas
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 ]
Plaintiff: Morningstar Holding Corporation
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?