Ackerman v. Ackerman
| Norman Mactas Ackerman |
| John Herbert Ackerman |
| 1:2010cv06773 |
| September 13, 2010 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| XX Out of State |
| John G. Koeltl |
| Other Fraud |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
| 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
76
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER #102878. The Court has considered all of the arguments of the parties. To the extent not specifically addressed above, the remaining arguments are either moot or without merit. For the foregoing reasons, the plaintiff's Motion for Reconsideration is denied. (Signed by Judge John G. Koeltl on 2/5/2013). (rjm) Modified on 2/5/2013 (rsh).
|
|
Filing
59
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: The Court has considered all of the arguments of the parties. To the extent not specifically addressed above, the remaining arguments are either moot or without merit. For the foregoing reasons, the defendant's Moti on to Dismiss is granted, and the defendant's Motion to Cancel the Notices of Pendency is granted. The Second Amended Complaint is therefore dismissed with prejudice. The Clerk is directed to enter Judgment and to close this case and all pending motions. (Signed by Judge John G. Koeltl on 12/12/2012) (pl)
|
|
Filing
34
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER re: 29 MOTION for Sanctions. filed by Norman Mactas Ackerman, 22 MOTION for Extension of Time. filed by Norman Mactas Ackerman, 19 MOTION to Dismiss. filed by John Herbert Ackerman. The Court has considered all of the arguments raised by the parties. To the extent not specifically addressed, the arguments are either moot or without merit. The defendants motion to dismiss is granted, and the Complaint is dismissed without prejudice to the filing of an Amended C omplaint within 30 days. The plaintiffs motion for sanctions is denied. The defendants application for a filing injunction against the plaintiff is denied. The defendants motion to vacate the notices of pendency is denied without prejudice to renewal. The Clerk is directed to close Docket Nos. 19, 22 and 29, and to close this case. (Signed by Judge John G. Koeltl on 2/7/2012) (djc)
|
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: Ackerman v. Ackerman | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Norman Mactas Ackerman | |
| 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: John Herbert Ackerman | |
| 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.
