Regional Multiple Listing Service of Minnesota, Inc. v. American Home Realty Network, Inc.
| Regional Multiple Listing Service of Minnesota, Inc. |
| American Home Realty Network, Inc. |
| 0:2012cv00965 |
| April 18, 2012 |
| US District Court for the District of Minnesota |
| DMN Office |
| Ramsey |
| Franklin L. Noel |
| John R. Tunheim |
| Copyrights |
| 17 U.S.C. ยง 101 |
| 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
366
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER denying 146 Counterclaim Defendants Edina Realty and HomeService's Motion to Dismiss/General (Written Opinion). Signed by Judge John R. Tunheim on March 31, 2014. (HAZ)
|
|
Filing
350
ORDER no changes will be made to the January 8, 2014 281 Order (Written Opinion). Signed by Judge John R. Tunheim on March 11, 2014. (DML)
|
|
Filing
281
ORDER amending paragraph 2 of the preliminary injunction order (as set out in Docket 35 121 265 Orders) (Written Opinion). Signed by Judge John R. Tunheim on January 8, 2014. (DML)
|
|
Filing
265
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER granting 131 Motion to Modify the Amended Preliminary Injunction by STRIKING amended paragraph 2(c) of the September 27, 2012 35 preliminary injunction order (as amended by the 121 order amending the preliminary injunction order). (Written Opinion). Signed by Judge John R. Tunheim on December 10, 2013. (DML)
|
|
Filing
121
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER (1) Granting in part and denying in part plaintiff's 47 Motion for Civil Contempt. (2) Denying plaintiff's 78 Motion to Dismiss. (3) Amending the September 27, 2012, preliminary injunction 35 order by striking paragraph 2 in the ordering section and replacing it with the language in this Order (Written Opinion). Signed by Judge John R. Tunheim on July 5, 2013. (DML)
|
|
Filing
35
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER denying defendant's 7 Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction or in the Alternative to Transfer Venue to the Northern District of California; granting in part and denying in part plaintiff's 14 Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Written Opinion). Signed by Judge John R. Tunheim on September 27, 2012. (DML)
|
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 Minnesota 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
| Search for this case: Regional Multiple Listing Service of Minnesota, Inc. v. American Home Realty Network, Inc. | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Regional Multiple Listing Service of Minnesota, Inc. | |
| Represented By: | Brian N Larson |
| Represented By: | Jared B Briant |
| Represented By: | Calvin L Litsey |
| Represented By: | Mitchell A Skinner |
| Represented By: | Mary Andreleita Walker |
| 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: American Home Realty Network, Inc. | |
| Represented By: | Jeffrey C Brown |
| Represented By: | Kenneth H Fukuda |
| Represented By: | Jonathan A Strauss |
| 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.
