Trueex, LLC et al v. Markitserv Limited et al
| Trueex, LLC and Truepts, LLC |
| Markitserv Limited and Markitserv, LLC |
| 1:2017cv03400 |
| May 8, 2017 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| Lewis A. Kaplan |
| Antitrust |
| 15 U.S.C. ยง 2 |
| 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
58
MEMORANDUM OPINION re: 22 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction filed by Truepts, LLC, Trueex, LLC. The historic purpose of a preliminary injunction is to maintain the status quo pending a full trial where all facts and arguments may be considered with adequate preparation and in their complete context. As the foregoing demonstrates, this is a case in which full and expanded consideration is essential. At a minimum, there are serious questions going to the merits. In the circumstances, the balance of hardships tips decidedly in trueEX's favor. For those and all the reasons stated above, plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction [DI 22] is granted with respect to trueEX. It is denied, however, with respect to truePTS, principally because truePTS has not shown any likelihood of success on its claims. It is important to recognize that the Court is dealing here only with a preliminary injunction the purpose of which is to preserve the status quo pending trial. The Court already has raised with the parties the question whether trueEX, were it to prevail, would be entitled to a permanent injunction requiring MarkitSERV to continue to deal with it in perpetuity in the manner it did prior to the termination notice, which would be a very different matter. trueEX recognizes that it would have to deal with that troublesome problem were it to win at trial. In all the circumstances, defendants Markit SERV Limited and MarkitSERV, LLC be and they hereby are enjoined and restrained, pending hearing and determination of the action, from directly or indirectly terminating the BTA or discontinuing the provision of drop-copy service to plaint iff trueEX, LLC. No bond is required because the Court finds that there is no likelihood of harm to defendants. The foregoing constitute the Court's findings of fact and conclusions of law. (Signed by Judge Lewis A. Kaplan on 7/18/2017) (mro)
|
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.
