Castillo Grand, LLC v. Sheraton Operating Corporation
Castillo Grand, LLC |
Sheraton Operating Corporation |
1:2009cv07197 |
August 14, 2009 |
US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
Foley Square Office |
XX Out of State |
Unassigned |
None |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract |
None |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 59 OPINION AND ORDER: Castillo does not provide evidence such that would disturb the Courts conclusion that the Bernstein affidavit constituted insufficient evidence to justify an award of sanctions. Accordingly, Castillos motion is denied. Sheraton mov es for attorneys fees incurred in responding to Castillos motion pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1927. Sheraton has not established that Castillo, in filing this motion for reconsideration, was acting in bad faith or for an improper purpose, and thus Sheratons motion is denied. (Signed by Judge Robert P. Patterson on 5/6/2011) Copies Faxed By Chambers. (jpo) |
Filing 52 OPINION AND ORDER: Sheraton's Motion for Just Costs is granted and Castillo's Cross-Motion for Sanctions is denied. (Signed by Judge Robert P. Patterson on 12/23/2010) (See OPINION AND ORDER as set forth) Copies Faxed By Chambers. (lnl) |
Filing 35 OPINION AND ORDER re:#98326 9 MOTION to Dismiss Improper Venue filed by Sheraton Operating Corporation, 12 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction subject matter filed by Sheraton Operating Corporation. For the foregoing reasons, Defendant She raton's motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction is granted. Defendant also outlines the details of the diversity creating transactions and argues that this Court should disregard these transactions because they lacked economic substance and because the Santangelo transaction was not consummated prior to the filing of this action. For these reasons, Defendant argues that even if the transactions did not violate § 1359, complete diversity did not exist as of the filing of this complaint. Because the Court finds that the transactions violated § 1359, even assuming arguendo that they were completed and effective before filing, the Court need not reach Defendant's factual arguments about the details of the t ransactions, even though they do not appear to be groundless. Defendant also moves to dismiss the complaint for improper venue. In light of the Court's ruling on the issue of subject matter jurisdiction, Defendant's motion to dismiss for improper venue is denied as moot. IT IS SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Robert P. Patterson on 12/9/2009) Copies Mailed By Chambers.(tve) Modified on 12/11/2009 (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
Search for this case: Castillo Grand, LLC v. Sheraton Operating Corporation | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Plaintiff: Castillo Grand, LLC | |
Represented By: | Todd Evan Soloway |
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: Sheraton Operating Corporation | |
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.