Clark v. Sullivan et al
| Marilyn Clark |
| Martin Sullivan, Edmund S.W. Tse, Win J. Neuger, Frank G. Wisner, Brian T. Schreiber, Steven J. Bensinger, William N. Dooley, Frederick W. Geissinger, Elias F. Habayeb, Robert E Lewis, Marshall A. Cohen, Martin D. Feldstein, Ellen V. Futter, Richard C. Holbrooke, Frank G. Zarb, Stephen L. Hammerman, George L. Miles, Jr., Morris W. Offit, Michael H. Sutton, Fred H. Langhammer, James F. Orr, III, Virginia M. Rometty and Robert B. Willumstad |
| 1:2007cv10464 |
| November 20, 2007 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| XX Out of State |
| Loretta A. Preska |
| Stockholders Suits |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity - Stockholders Suits |
| 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
141
OPINION AND ORDER granting (75 in 1:07-cv-10464-LTS) MOTION to Dismiss the Amended Consolidated Derivative Complaint, and terminating (97 in 1:07-cv-10464-LTS) MOTION to Dismiss, (83 in 1:07-cv-10464-LTS) MOTION to Dismiss the Verified Cons olidated Shareholder Derivative Complaint, (100 in 1:07-cv-10464-LTS, 27 in 1:07-cv-10466-LTS, 27 in 1:08-cv-07019-LTS) MOTION to Dismiss the Verified Amended Consolidated Shareholder Derivative Complaint, (88 in 1:07-cv-10464-LTS) MOTION to Dismiss the Amended Consolidated Shareholder Derivative Complaint, (91 in 1:07-cv-10464-LTS) MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Verified Amended Consolidated Shareholder Derivative Complaint, (85 in 1:07-cv-10464-LTS) MOTION to Dismi ss, (94 in 1:07-cv-10464-LTS) MOTION to Dismiss Amended Consolidated Derivative Complaint. For the reasons set forth in this Opinion and Order, AIG's motion to dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint for failure to make a demand on the Board (docket entry no. 75) is granted. The Complaint is dismissed in its entirety for failure to satisfy the requirements of Rule 23.1 of the F.R.C.P. The other motions to dismiss the Complaint that have been filed by various individual defendants and g roups of individual defendants (Docket entry nos. 83, 85, 88, 91, 94, 97 and 100) are all terminated in light of the Court's conclusion that the pre-suit demand requirement has not been fulfilled. The Clerk of the Court is respectfully requeste d to enter judgment dismissing the Complaint for failure to make a pre-suit demand or allege demand futility sufficiently and close this case. This Opinion and Order resolves docket entry nos. 75, 83, 85, 88, 91, 94, 97 and 100. (Signed by Judge Laura Taylor Swain on 3/30/2010) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:07-cv-10464-LTS, 1:07-cv-10466-LTS, 1:08-cv-07019-LTS, 1:09-cv-05468-LTS(tro)
|
|
Filing
127
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER:#98394 The motion to intervene is denied. This Order resolves docket entry no. 105. (Signed by Judge Laura Taylor Swain on 12/23/2009) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:07-cv-10464-LTS, 1:07-cv-10466-LTS, 1:08-cv-07019-LTS, 1:09-cv-05468-LTS(jpo) Modified on 12/28/2009 (eef).
|
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 Southern 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
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.
