Demaj v. Sakaj
Petitioner: Esheref Demaj
Respondent: Frida Sakaj
Case Number: 3:2009cv00255
Filed: February 11, 2009
Court: US District Court for the District of Connecticut
Office: Other Statutory Actions Office
County: XX Outside US
Presiding Judge: Peter C. Dorsey
Nature of Suit: None
Cause of Action: Federal Question
Jury Demanded By: International Child Abduction Remedies Act

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
March 18, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 203 MEMORANDUM OF DECISION. It is ordered that Demaj's Petition for return of the children to Italy is denied and judgment to that effect shall enter forthwith. Signed by Judge Joan G. Margolis on 3/18/2013.(Rodko, B.)
September 19, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 176 ORDER SEALING LIMITED FILINGS UNDER FED. R. CIV. P. 5.2(a)(3). Signed by Judge Joan G. Margolis on 9/19/2012. (Rodko, B.)
September 4, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 158 RULING: denying as moot, as "parental alienation" was not, and will not be, permitted under the August 29 Ruling 155 Motion in Limine. Signed by Judge Joan G. Margolis on 9/4/2012. (Rodko, B.)
August 29, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 152 RULING: granting in part and denying in part 148 Motion in Limine; granting in part and denying in part 149 Letter Request for Dr. Benjamin Garber to testify. Signed by Judge Joan G. Margolis on 8/29/2012. (Rodko, B.)
August 23, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 142 ORDER: granting in part 130 Motion to Quash. Signed by Judge Joan G. Margolis on 8/23/2012. (Rodko, B.)
August 22, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 141 ORDER: granting in part 135 Motion to Take Deposition; granting in part 139 Motion for Protective Order. Signed by Judge Joan G. Margolis on 8/22/2012. (Rodko, B.)
August 17, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 133 ORDER denying without prejudice to renew, as appropriate 67 Motion in Limine. SEE ATTACHED ELECTRONIC ENDORSEMENT ORDER FOR DETAILS. Signed by Judge Joan G. Margolis on 8/17/2012. (Watson, M.)
March 21, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 118 RULING granting 102 Motion for Reconsideration on 99 Decision on Petitioner's Oral Motion to Compel ; denying 106 MOTION to Exclude Certain Petitioner's Exhibits. Signed by Judge Joan G. Margolis on 3/21/2012. (Gutierrez, Y.)
February 15, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 89 *AMENDED* RULING ON PETITIONER'S OBJECTION TO TESTIMONY OF DR. DAVID MANTELL: re Ruling 88 Overruling Petitioner's objection to Dr. Mantell's testimony. Signed by Judge Joan G. Margolis on 2/15/2012. (This entry corrects #88, which was entered in error) (Rodko, B.)
February 14, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 85 RULING: granting in part and denying in part 61 Motion to Compel. Signed by Judge Joan G. Margolis on 2/14/2012. (Rodko, B.)
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 Connecticut District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Demaj v. Sakaj
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Esheref Demaj
Represented By: James F. DeDonato
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 ]
Respondent: Frida Sakaj
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?