Torres v. Toback, Bernstein & Reiss LLP et al
Plaintiff: |
Leilani Torres |
Defendant: |
Brian K Bernstein, Loraine Campbell, John Does 1-10, Leonard S Reiss, Arthur M Toback and Toback, Bernstein & Reiss LLP |
Case Number: |
1:2011cv01368 |
Filed: |
March 21, 2011 |
Court: |
US District Court for the Eastern District of New York |
Office: |
Brooklyn Office |
Presiding Judge: |
Nicholas G. Garaufis |
Presiding Judge: |
Viktor V. Pohorelsky |
Nature of Suit: |
Consumer Credit |
Cause of Action: |
15:1692 Fair Debt Collection Act |
Jury Demanded By: |
Plaintiff |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Date Filed |
Document Text |
January 23, 2017 |
Filing
107
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER granting 105 Motion for Attorney Fees; granting 106 Motion for Attorney Fees. See annexed opinion for details. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Viktor V. Pohorelsky on 1/23/2017. (Pohorelsky, Viktor)
|
March 31, 2014 |
Filing
80
ORDER re REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS: For the foregoing reasons, the R&R's recommendations that (1) the class be conditionally certified as two sub-classes for the purpose of settlement, and (2) Plaintiff's counsel be appointed as Class Counsel are ADOPTED WITH MODIFICATIONS contained herein. As for the R&R's recommendations that (3) preliminary approval of the proposed settlement be granted, and (4) the class notice be approved, the court A DOPTS the findings of the R&R but RESERVES DECISION pending the parties' submission. By April 11, 2014, the parties shall file with the court a revised settlement, class notice, and conditional order addressing the modifications discussed in the R&R and this Order. So Ordered by Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis on 3/29/2014. (Lee, Tiffeny)
|
January 25, 2012 |
Filing
48
OPINION AND ORDER -- The plaintiff has moved to compel the defendants to produce the retainer agreement between the defendant Toback, Bernstein & Reiss LLP (Toback Bernstein) and its client, Columbia University, pursuant to which the defendant perfor med the debt collection services at issue in this litigation. In addition, the court has been asked to address whether the attorney-client privilege has been properly asserted by the defendants with respect to a number of documents that have been submitted for in camera review. The plaintiff's motion to compel production of the retainer agreement is granted. See annexed order for details. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Viktor V. Pohorelsky on 1/24/12. (Newton, Joan)
|
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 New York Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
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?