BLOCK v. JAGUAR LAND ROVER NORTH AMERICA, LLC
AMY BLOCK |
JAGUAR LAND ROVER NORTH AMERICA, LLC |
2:2015cv05957 |
August 3, 2015 |
US District Court for the District of New Jersey |
Newark Office |
Bergen |
Stanley R. Chesler |
Cathy L. Waldor |
Other Fraud |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
Plaintiff |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 196 OPINION. Signed by Judge Stanley R. Chesler on 2/22/2022. (ld, ) |
Filing 83 OPINION AND ORDER; that Plaintiffs' appeal (Docket Entry No. 80) of the Magistrate Judge's letter order, dated July 17, 2017, is DENIED; that the Magistrate Judge's letter order (Docket Entry No. 77), dated July17, 2017, is AFFIRMED. Signed by Judge Stanley R. Chesler on 8/23/2017. (ld, ) |
Filing 64 OPINION AND ORDER granting Plaintiffs 57 Motion for Reconsideration. The Opinion and Order entered on March 7, 2017 is hereby MODIFIED as follows: insofar as that decision dismissed with prejudice fraud claims based on omissions, on the sole groun d that the SAC failed to plead facts sufficient to infer Jaguars knowledge of the alleged defect at the time it placed the vehicle in question into the stream of commerce, those dismissals with prejudice are hereby modified to dismissals without prej udice; Plaintiffs are granted leave to file a Third Amended Complaint, in conformity with this decision, also to include the amendments permitted in the Opinion and Order entered on March 7, 2017, within 30 days of the date of entry of this decision. Signed by Judge Stanley R. Chesler on 04/25/2017. (ek) |
Filing 56 OPINION AND ORDER granting Defendants 38 Motion to Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint, etc. Plaintiffs are granted leave to amend the Second Amended Complaint to allege additional facts to support the Tenth Claim, violation of the MACPL, only, within 30 days of the date of entry of this Order. Signed by Judge Stanley R. Chesler on 03/07/2017. (ek) |
Filing 27 OPINION AND ORDER denying as moot 9 Motion to Dismiss; granting in part and denying in part 17 Motion to Dismiss; and it further ORDERED that, as to the First, Second, Third and Fourth Counts in the Amended Complaint, the motion to dismiss is G RANTED, and these claims are hereby DISMISSED without prejudice; and it is further ORDERED that, as to the Sixth Count in the Amended Complaint for Plaintiff Block only, the motion to dismiss is GRANTED, and the Sixth Count for Plaintiff Block only is hereby DISMISSED without prejudice; and it is further ORDERED that, as to the remaining claims in the Amended Complaint, the motion to dismiss is DENIED. Signed by Judge Stanley R. Chesler on 5/26/2016. (seb) |
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 New Jersey 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: BLOCK v. JAGUAR LAND ROVER NORTH AMERICA, LLC | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Plaintiff: AMY BLOCK | |
Represented By: | BRUCE HELLER NAGEL |
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: JAGUAR LAND ROVER NORTH AMERICA, LLC | |
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.