IN RE CRM HOLDINGS, Lm. SECURITIES LITIGATION
| Beverly L. Munter |
| CRM Holdings, Ltd., Daniel G. Hickey, Jr., Martin D. Rakoff, James J. Scardino and Daniel G. Hickey, Sr. |
| 1:2010cv00975 |
| February 5, 2010 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| Nassau |
| Robert P. Patterson |
| Securities/Commodities |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 Fed. Question |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
72
OPINION & ORDER. THEREFORE, in consideration of the strong prescription against the potential for piecemeal appeals discussed in Rule 54(b) and by controlling legal precedent, and in consideration of Plaintiffs' representations that a stipulatio n withdrawing their Proof of Claim from Bankruptcy Court is forthcoming, this Court DENIES Plaintiffs' Rule 54(b) motion without prejudice to counsel submitting such a motion after the filing of a stipulation withdrawing their bankruptcy claim against CRM. (Signed by Judge Robert P. Patterson on 6/14/2013) (lmb)
|
|
Filing
53
OPINION AND ORDER re: 41 MOTION for Reconsideration re; 38 Memorandum & Opinion, Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) filed by Brett Brandes, B&B Investors, LP, Beverly L. Munter, 39 MOTION for Reconsideration of the Court's Opinio n & Order Dated May 10, 2012. filed by Brett Brandes, Beverly L. Munter. For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiffs' Local Rule 6.3 Motion for Reconsideration is DENIED, and Plaintiffs Rule 59 Motion is also DENIED. (Signed by Judge Robert P. Patterson on 3/4/2013) (lmb)
|
|
Filing
38
OPINION AND ORDER re: 19 MOTION to Dismiss. filed by James J. Scardino, Martin D. Rakoff, Daniel G. Hickey, Sr., Daniel G. Hickey, Jr., CRM Holdings, Ltd. For the foregoing reasons, the Defendants motion to dismiss (ECF No. 19) is granted with resp ect to the Individual Defendants. Plaintiffs will not be given leave to replead, as the CAC is Plaintiffs second complaint in this action, and Plaintiffs have already had the benefit of extensive discovery, which they relied on in crafting the CAC. (Signed by Judge Robert P. Patterson on 5/10/2012) Copies Sent By Chambers. (jar)
|
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 New York Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
