Ex Parte Application of Malcolm Cohen and Edward Terence Kerr
In Re: Ex Parte Application of Malcolm Cohen and Edward Terence Kerr
Case Number: 1:2016mc02947
Filed: November 21, 2016
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of New York
Office: Brooklyn Office
Presiding Judge: Margo K. Brodie
Presiding Judge: Roanne L. Mann
Nature of Suit: Other

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
December 22, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 3 ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS. For the reasons set forth in the attached Memorandum and Order, the Court adopts Judge Mann's R&R in its entirety. The Applicants' proposed order, (Docket Entry No. 1-5), is granted with the exce ption that the Court orders Ruddick to respond to the document requests submitted with the Application within thirty (30) days of service of this Memorandum and Order and orders Applicants to pay the costs of discovery. Ordered by Judge Margo K. Brodie on 12/22/2016. (Daugherty, Shannon)
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

Search for this case: Ex Parte Application of Malcolm Cohen and Edward Terence Kerr
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
In re: Ex Parte Application of Malcolm Cohen and Edward Terence Kerr
Represented By: George Brandon
Represented By: Paul Myung Han Kim
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.


Why Is My Information Online?