Temtex Industries, Inc. v. TPS Associates, L.L.C. et al

Plaintiff: Temtex Industries, Inc.
Defendant: TPS Associates, L.L.C. and Martin Borg
Case Number: 1:2009cv01379
Filed: March 4, 2009
Court: Illinois Northern District Court
Office: Contract: Other Office
County: Cook
Presiding Judge: Joan H. Lefkow
Nature of Suit: None
Cause of Action: Diversity
Jury Demanded By: 28:1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed#Document Text
July 18, 2012 134 Opinion or Order of the Court MEMORANDUM Opinion and Order Signed by the Honorable Joan H. Lefkow on 7/18/2012:Mailed notice(mad, )
June 4, 2012 130 Opinion or Order of the Court WRITTEN Opinion entered by the Honorable Joan H. Lefkow on 6/4/2012: Milano Concepts, LLC's Rule 60(b) motion to set aside default and judgment and to dismiss the complaint for lack of jurisdiction [# 118 ] is granted. The court's August 30, 2011 order of default against Milano Concepts, LLC [# 110 ] and December 13, 2011 judgment against Milano Concepts, LLC [# 115 ] are vacated. TPS Associates, LLC's third party complaint against Milano Concepts, LLC [# 89 ] is dismissed with prejudice for lack of jurisdiction. TPS Associates, LLC is granted leave to file an amended counterclaim joining Harold Rotman and Nutrano by June 11, 2012. Status hearing set for July 19, 2012 at 8:30 a.m. See the statement section of this order for details. Mailed notice(mad, )
March 30, 2012 116 Opinion or Order of the Court WRITTEN Opinion entered by the Honorable Joan H. Lefkow on 3/30/2012: TPS is ordered to submit to this court by April 20, 2012 a statement setting forth with particularity the basis, under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, for TPS's counter claim against Temtex and its third-party claims against Gary and Harold Rotman, Nutrano, Inc. and Milano Concepts, LLC. TPS must also submit a jurisdictional statement setting forth the basis of the courts personal and subject matter jurisdiction ov er each of the parties and all of TPS's claims in this case. Temtex and the third-party defendants may, if they so choose, submit the same by April 20, 2012. TPS's motion for summary judgment against Harold Rotman [#92] is denied without prejudice until this court determines whether it possesses jurisdiction over the claims and parties in this case.Mailed notice(mad, )
December 2, 2011 113 Opinion or Order of the Court MOTION by ThirdParty Plaintiff TPS Associates, L.L.C. for judgment (Hanfling, Norman)
April 28, 2011 86 Opinion or Order of the Court MOTION by Counter Claimant TPS Associates, L.L.C. for judgment (Hanfling, Norman)

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 Illinois Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Temtex Industries, Inc. v. TPS Associates, L.L.C. et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Temtex Industries, Inc.
Represented By: Karen L. Blouin
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: TPS Associates, L.L.C.
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Martin Borg
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 [ 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?