CDO Plus Master Fund Ltd. v. Wachovia Bank
||December 7, 2007
||US District Court for the Southern District of New York
||Foley Square Office
||Laura Taylor Swain
|Nature of Suit:
|Cause of Action:
||28:1441 Petition For Removal--Other Contract
|Jury Demanded By:
Access additional case information on PACER
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|September 29, 2011
MEMORANDUM ORDER. For the foregoing reasons, Wachovia is hereby awarded a total of $2,096,138.31, which is comprised of the Settlement Amount of $1,017,709.66, interest on that Settlement Amount at LIBOR plus 1% from December 18, 2007, to today's date (totaling $75,172.81), and attorneys' fees and costs of $1,033,255.84. This resolves docket entry number 87. The Clerk of the Court is respectfully requested to enter judgment in accordance with this Memorandum Order and close this case. Granting 87 Motion for Judgment. (Signed by Judge Laura Taylor Swain on 9/28/11) (rjm)
|August 16, 2010
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: For the foregoing reasons, Wachovias motion for summary judgment dismissing CDOs breach of contract claim is granted, as set forth in this Memorandum Opinion and Order. If they are unable to agree, they must submit a joi nt statement to the Court by September 10, 2010, detailing the parties respective positions as to the amount recoverable, the evidence in support thereof, and any legal arguments relevant to the computation of Wachovias damages. It is further ordered that the parties show cause, by filed written submission (with courtesy copies for Chambers) by September 10, 2010, as to why all documents filed under seal in connection with this motion practice (docket entry nos. 71, 79 and 83) should not be unse aled in whole or in part in light of the common law right of access to judicial documents and the qualified First Amendment right of access to judicial records. Any replies to these initial submissions must be filed (with courtesy copies for Chambers) by September 17, 2010. (Signed by Judge Laura Taylor Swain on 8/16/2010) (jpo)
|July 13, 2009
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER:#97735 For reasons further set forth in said Order, CDOs first, second, third, fourth, sixth, seventh and eighth causes of action are dismissed. CDOs fifth cause of action, construed as a breach of contract claim premised upon Wachovias alleged breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, survives Wachovias motion for judgment on the pleadings. Wachovias motion for judgment on the pleadings with respect to its counterclaim is denied. The Pre-Trial Schedulin g Order (docket entry no. 16), suspended by Order of the Court on March 4, 2009, is hereby reinstated, and the Final Pre-Conference date in paragraph 9 is rescheduled for Friday, November 20, 2009, at 3:00 p.m. The consultation and submission require ments relating to the Final Pre-Trial Conference provisions of the scheduling order are modified accordingly. The parties are directed to meet promptly with Magistrate Judge Peck for settlement purposes. This Memorandum Opinion and Order resolves doc ket entry no. 26. 26 MOTION for Judgment on the Pleadings / Wachovia Bank's Notice of Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings filed by Wachovia Bank. (Final Pretrial Conference set for 11/20/2009 at 03:00 PM before Judge Laura Taylor Swain.) (Signed by Judge Laura Taylor Swain on 7/13/09) (db) Modified on 7/14/2009 (db). Modified on 7/14/2009 (jab).
|December 7, 2007
NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Supreme Court, County of New York. Case Number: 603916-07. (Filing Fee $ 350.00, Receipt Number 635253).Document filed by Wachovia Bank.(mbe)
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
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?