Univ. Trading & Inv. Co., Inc., et al. v. Bureau for Representing UA Int. in Int'l & Foreign Courts, et al.
| Universal Trading & Investment Company, Inc. and Foundation Honesty International, Inc. |
| Bureau for Representing Ukrainian Interests in International and Foreign Courts, Ukrainian Prosecutor General's Office and Ukraine |
| 1:2010cv12015 |
| November 26, 2010 |
| US District Court for the District of Massachusetts |
| Boston Office |
| Essex |
| Douglas P. Woodlock |
| Other Contract |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
| 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
271
Judge Douglas P. Woodlock: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER entered finding as moot 204 Motion for Sanctions; acknowledging 218 Report and Recommendations; granting 219 Motion for Summary Judgment; denying 225 Motion for relief under Rule 56(d); denying 259 Motion to Amend; denying 263 Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Woodlock, Douglas)
|
|
Filing
63
Judge Douglas P. Woodlock: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER entered granting in part and denying in part 27 Motion to Dismiss, specifically the motion is denied as to Count Two with respect to Plaintiffs claim for reimbursement for their recovery efforts and as to Count Seven to the degree a determination of the duration of the April 30, 1999 Power of Attorney may be implicated in a resolution of Count II. (Woodlock, Douglas)
|
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 Massachusetts 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.
