Interpharm, Inc. v. Wells Fargo Bank et al
| Interpharm, Inc. |
| Wells Fargo Bank and National Association |
| 1:2008cv11365 |
| December 31, 2008 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Contract: Other Office |
| Suffolk |
| Gerard E. Lynch |
| Plaintiff |
| Diversity |
| 28:1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract |
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
27
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: For the reasons given above, Wells Fargo's motion to dismiss 13 is granted in part and denied in part. It is granted as to plaintiffs third, fourth, and fifth causes of action. It is also granted as to plaintiffs first and second causes of action, except to the extent they are brought for claims arising after May 14, 2008. These claims will survive. (Signed by Judge Richard J. Holwell on 3/31/2010) (jpo)
|
|
Filing
26
OPINION AND ORDER re: #98727 4 MOTION to Disqualify Counsel for Defendant filed by Interpharm, Inc. Accordingly, for all the foregoing reasons, plaintiff Interpharm's motion to disqulify Jeffrey A. Wurst, Esq. and his law firm, Ruskin Moscou FAltischek, P.C. is denied without prejudice to renewal. The Clerk of the Court is directed to mark Docket Item 4 closed. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Henry B. Pitman on 3/25/2010) Copies Transmitted By Chambers.(tro) Modified on 3/26/2010 (ajc).
|
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.
