Normand et al v. Bank of New York Mellon
Plaintiff: David Feige, Annie L. Normand and Don A. Carofano
Defendant: Bank of New York Mellon
Case Number: 1:2016cv00212
Filed: January 11, 2016
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of New York
Office: Foley Square Office
County: XX Out of State
Presiding Judge: J. Paul Oetken
Nature of Suit: Other Contract
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
July 1, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 175 ORDER APPROVING DISTRIBUTION PLAN: NOW, THEREFORE, upon careful consideration of: (i) the Declaration of Justin R. Hughes in Support of Lead Plaintiffs' Motion for Approval of Distribution Plan ("Hughes Declaration"); (ii) the Memo randum of Law in Support of Lead Plaintiffs' Unopposed Motion for Approval of Distribution Plan; and (iii) the other submissions and papers on file with the Court; and upon all prior proceedings heretofore and herein, and after due deliberation, it is hereby ORDERED, that all capitalized terms not otherwise defined herein shall have the same meanings as set forth in the Stipulation and the Hughes Declaration; and it is further ORDERED, that the administrative determinations of KCC accepting the Claims described in the Hughes Declaration and listed on Exhibits B-1 and B-2 thereto, calculated pursuant to the Court-approved Plan of Allocation set forth in the Notice, are hereby approved, and said Claims are hereby accepted; and it is furt her ORDERED, that the administrative determinations of KCC rejecting the Claims described in the Hughes Declaration and listed on Exhibit B-3 thereto are hereby approved, and said Claims are hereby rejected; and it is further ORDERED, that KCC be pai d the sum of $737,521.64 from the Net Settlement Fund as payment for its outstanding fees and expenses incurred in connection with the administration of the Settlement and for the fees and expenses expected to be incurred by KCC in connection wi th the Initial Distribution of the Net Settlement Fund to Authorized Recipients; and it is further ORDERED, that KCC conduct the Initial Distribution of the Net Settlement Fund as set forth in paragraph 52 of the Hughes Declaration. Specifically, the Net Settlement Fund shall be distributed to the Authorized Recipients listed on Exhibits B-1 and B-2 to the Hughes Declaration pursuant to the Court-approved Plan of Allocation in proportion to each Authorized Recipient's Recognized Claim as co mpared to the total Recognized Claims of all Authorized Recipients as shown on such Exhibits; and it is further ORDERED, that all checks to Authorized Recipients issued in the Initial Distribution shall bear the notation "CASH PROMPTLY. VOID AND SUBJECT TO RE-DISTRIBUTION IF NOT CASHED 90 DAYS AFTER ISSUE DATE." Lead Plaintiffs' Counsel and KCC are authorized to take appropriate actions to locate and/or contact any Authorized Recipient who has not cashed his, her or its check within said time; and it is further And as set forth herein. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge J. Paul Oetken on 7/01/2021) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:16-cv-00212-JPO-JLC, 1:16-cv-02834-JPO (ama)
August 11, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 168 ORDER re: 167 Letter, 166 Letter. Counsel for the Settlement Class shall respond on or before August 28, 2020, to the questions raised by potential Settlement Class Member Ted Huey in his docketed letters dated June 28, 2020, and July 27, 2020. So Ordered (Signed by Judge J. Paul Oetken on 8/11/2020) Copies Mailed By Chambers. (js)
September 29, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 36 OPINION AND ORDER re: 21 MOTION to Dismiss the Complaint. filed by Bank of New York Mellon. For the foregoing reasons, the Defendant's motion to dismiss is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. The Clerk of Court is directed to close the motion at Docket Number 21. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge J. Paul Oetken on 9/29/2016) (ama)
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 New York Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Normand et al v. Bank of New York Mellon
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: David Feige
Represented By: Daniel Patrick Chiplock
Represented By: Sharan Nirmul
Represented By: Daniel Edward Seltz
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: Annie L. Normand
Represented By: Daniel Patrick Chiplock
Represented By: Sharan Nirmul
Represented By: Daniel Edward Seltz
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: Don A. Carofano
Represented By: Daniel Patrick Chiplock
Represented By: Sharan Nirmul
Represented By: Daniel Edward Seltz
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: Bank of New York Mellon
Represented By: James L. Brochin
Represented By: Elizabeth M. Sacksteder
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?