Dukes Bridge LLC v. Security Life of Denver Insurance Company
Dukes Bridge LLC |
Security Life of Denver Insurance Company |
1:2010cv05491 |
November 29, 2010 |
US District Court for the Eastern District of New York |
Brooklyn Office |
I. Leo Glasser |
Robert M. Levy |
Insurance |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Insurance Contract |
Plaintiff |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 296 OPINION & ORDER: For the reasons stated in the attached Opinion & Order, Security Life is entitled to the following as fraud damages from Rubin: - $1,046,760.00, the amount of commissions it paid out on the Policy; - $1,637,371.13 , the amount it expended in attorney's fees defending against Dukes Bridge; - Pre-judgment interest of $1,648,701.41 and $661.85 per day from July 20, 2020, through the date judgment is entered; and - Post-judgment interest pursu ant to 28 U.S.C. § 1961. Security Life should submit a proposed judgment to the Clerk of Court by 7/27/2020. After entry of Judgment, the Clerk of Court is directed to close this case. So Ordered by Magistrate Judge Sanket J. Bulsara on 7/20/2020. (Ferrara, Anthony) |
Filing 180 ORDER granting 158 Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction; finding as moot 158 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim. Ordered by Judge I. Leo Glasser on 4/27/2016. (Shamah, Adam) |
Filing 171 MEMORANDUM & ORDER granting in part and denying in part 146 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim. For the reasons set forth herein, the motion is GRANTED solely as to Counts III and IV and otherwise DENIED. Ordered by Judge I. Leo Glasser on 6/15/2015. (Carey, Charles) |
Filing 69 ORDER granting in part and denying in part 47 Motion to Dismiss. Ordered by Judge I. Leo Glasser on 2/4/2013. (Levy, Joshua) |
Filing 26 ORDER denying 11 Motion to Compel. Plaintiff Dukes Bridge LLC (plaintiff or Dukes Bridge) moves to compel defendant Security Life of Denver Insurance Co. (defendant or Security Life) to deposit with the Clerk of the Court sufficient sureties to se cure payment of any final judgment, in accordance with N.Y. Ins. Law § 1213(c)(1), and to strike defendants pleadings for its failure to comply with the pre-pleading payment security provisions of § 1213(c)(1). Because plaintiff cannot inv oke the protections of § 1213(c)(1), plaintiffs motion to compel the posting of a security and the striking of defendants pleadings is denied. For more details, see attached Memorandum and Order.. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Robert M. Levy on 7/20/2011. (Rosenbloom, Alexa) |
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 York Eastern 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: Dukes Bridge LLC v. Security Life of Denver Insurance Company | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Plaintiff: Dukes Bridge LLC | |
Represented By: | Eric A. Biderman |
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: Security Life of Denver Insurance Company | |
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.