USA v. Garrity et al
Plaintiff: USA
Defendant: Diane M. Garrity, Paul G. Garrity and Paul M. Sterczala
Case Number: 3:2015cv00243
Filed: February 20, 2015
Court: US District Court for the District of Connecticut
Office: New Haven Office
County: Fairfield
Presiding Judge: Michael P. Shea
Nature of Suit: Other
Cause of Action: 28:1345
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
February 28, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 210 ORDER. For the reasons set forth in the attached, the Government's motion to alter judgment (ECF No. 191) is GRANTED and the Defendants' motion to alter and reduce judgment (ECF No. 190) is DENIED. The Clerk shall enter judgment for the Plaintiff in the total amount of $1,330,460.50, consisting of the civil penalty of $936,691, interest of $56,252.78, and a late payment penalty of $337,516.72. Signed by Judge Michael P. Shea on 2/28/2019. (Guevremont, Nathan)
June 4, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 161 ORDER. The Court sets forth its rulings on the objections to the parties' respective proposed trial exhibits in the attached memorandum. Signed by Judge Michael P. Shea on 6/4/2018. (Taykhman, N.)
June 1, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 158 ORDER. For the reasons discussed in the attached, Plaintiff's 114 motion in limine to preclude the testimony of Defendants' proposed expert witness Howard Epstein is GRANTED. Signed by Judge Michael P. Shea on 6/1/2018. (Taykhman, N.)
April 3, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 116 ORDER. For the reasons discussed in the attached, I find that the Government must prove the elements of its claim for a judgment under 31 U.S.C. § 5321(a)(5) by a preponderance of the evidence and that proof of reckless conduct will satisfy the Government's burden on the element of willfulness. Signed by Judge Michael P. Shea on 4/3/2018. (Taykhman, N.)
May 20, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 47 ORDER. As set forth herein, the Court DENIES Defendants' motion 40 to amend the scheduling order and add their proposed counterclaim. The Court GRANTS Defendants' motion 46 to extend the period for fact discovery for 90 days. Discovery shall close on September 8, 2016. Signed by Judge Michael P. Shea on 5/20/16. (Bradley, K.)
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: USA v. Garrity et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: USA
Represented By: Austin L. Furman
Represented By: Christine L. Sciarrino
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: Diane M. Garrity
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: Paul G. Garrity
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: Paul M. Sterczala
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?