Sidley Holding Corp. v. Ruderman

Sidley Holding Corp. v. Ruderman

Plaintiff:	Sidley Holding Corp.
Defendant:	Morton Ruderman
Case Number:	1:2008cv02513
Filed:	March 12, 2008
Court:	US District Court for the Southern District of New York
Office:	Foley Square Office
County:	New York
Presiding Judge:	William H. Pauley
Nature of Suit:	Real Property: Other
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Other Contract
Jury Demanded By:	None

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed	Document Text
March 15, 2010	Filing 42 MEMORANDUM & ORDER adopting Report and Recommendations for 38 Report and Recommendations. For the reasons set forth in this Memorandum and Order, this Court overrules the objections and adopts Magistrate Judge Dolinger's thorough and well-reasoned Report in its entirety. Plaintiff is directed to submit a final judgment consistent with the Magistrate Judge's Report by 3/23/2010. (Signed by Judge William H. Pauley, III on 3/15/2010) (tro)
December 30, 2009	Filing 38 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: We recommend that plaintiff be awarded $180,709.90 in damages, subject to further reduction by any interest that has accrued on plaintiff's security deposit beyond the principal amount of $26,000. We also re commend that plaintiff be awarded $81,061.75 in attorneys' fees and $7,806.72 in disbursements. Finally, we recommend that this total amount of $269,578.37 be subject to an award of pre-judgment interest at the rate of 9% per year from 10/1/07 through the date of judgment. Objections to R&R due by 1/19/2010 (Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael H. Dolinger on 12/30/09) Copies mailed by chambers.(dle)

Date Filed

Document Text

March 15, 2010

Filing 42 MEMORANDUM & ORDER adopting Report and Recommendations for 38 Report and Recommendations. For the reasons set forth in this Memorandum and Order, this Court overrules the objections and adopts Magistrate Judge Dolinger's thorough and well-reasoned Report in its entirety. Plaintiff is directed to submit a final judgment consistent with the Magistrate Judge's Report by 3/23/2010. (Signed by Judge William H. Pauley, III on 3/15/2010) (tro)

December 30, 2009

Filing 38 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: We recommend that plaintiff be awarded $180,709.90 in damages, subject to further reduction by any interest that has accrued on plaintiff's security deposit beyond the principal amount of $26,000. We also re commend that plaintiff be awarded $81,061.75 in attorneys' fees and $7,806.72 in disbursements. Finally, we recommend that this total amount of $269,578.37 be subject to an award of pre-judgment interest at the rate of 9% per year from 10/1/07 through the date of judgment. Objections to R&R due by 1/19/2010 (Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael H. Dolinger on 12/30/09) Copies mailed by chambers.(dle)

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 Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Sidley Holding Corp. v. Ruderman
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: Sidley Holding Corp.
Represented By:	Heath Brian Kushnick
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: Morton Ruderman
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?