Freedman v. Weatherford International Ltd. et al
| Glenn Freedman |
| Weatherford International Ltd., Bernard J. Duroc-Danner and Andrew P. Becnel |
| 1:2012cv02121 |
| March 22, 2012 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| New York |
| Lewis A. Kaplan |
| Securities/Commodities/Exchanges |
| 15 U.S.C. ยง 78 |
| 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
108
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER denying 86 Motion for Reconsideration: For the foregoing reasons, I adhere to my determination in the July 25 Order. See Freedman, 2014 WL 3767034, at *3. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to terminate the plaintiffs' motion for reconsideration (Docket no. 86). (Signed by Magistrate Judge James C. Francis on 9/12/2014) Copies Mailed By Chambers. (tn)
|
|
Filing
83
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER denying 65 Motion to Compel; denying 66 Motion to Compel; denying 67 Motion to Compel. For the reasons discussed above, the plaintiffs' motions (Docket nos. 65, 66, and 67) are denied. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge James C. Francis on 7/25/2014) Copies Mailed By Chambers. (ama)
|
|
Filing
45
MEMORANDUM OPINION re: 38 MOTION to Dismiss the Amended Complaint filed by Andrew P. Becnel, Bernard J. Duroc-Danner, Weatherford International Ltd. Accordingly, defendants' motion to dismiss is denied. (Signed by Judge Lewis A. Kaplan on 9/19/2013) (lmb)
|
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.
