Sigmon v. Goldman Sachs Mortgage Company et al
| Wayne Sigmon |
| Goldman Sachs Mortgage Company, MLQ DML Hotel, L.L.C., MLQ DML SPA, L.L.C. and MLQ DML Restaurant, L.L.C. |
| 1:2012cv03367 |
| April 27, 2012 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| XX Out of State |
| Andrew L. Carter |
| Other Statutory Actions |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 |
| 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
237
OPINION AND ORDER re: 215 MOTION to Alter Judgment filed by Wayne Sigmon. For the reasons set forth above, Plaintiff's motion for reconsideration is DENIED. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr on 2/28/2019) (ne)
|
|
Filing
213
OPINION & ORDER: For the foregoing reasons, Defendants' motion for summary judgment is GRANTED and the Complaint is DISMISSED. All pending motions are denied as moot, and as further set forth in this order. (Signed by Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr on 3/26/2018) (ap)
|
|
Filing
158
MEMORANDUM ORDER: denying 145 Motion for Reconsideration. For the foregoing reasons, Sigmon's motion for reconsideration of the Court's October 27, 2016, ruling (Docket# 145) is denied. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Gabriel W. Gorenstein on 1/11/2017) (ama)
|
|
Filing
122
OPINION & ORDER re: 85 MOTION to Dismiss the Third Amended Complaint. filed by Goldman Sachs Mortgage Company, MLQ DML Hotel, L.L.C., MLQ DML Restaurant, L.L.C., MLQ DML SPA, L.L.C... For the reasons discussed above, Defendan ts' Motion to Dismiss the Third Amended Complaint is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. (ECF No. 85.) Defendants' motion to dismiss the constructive fraudulent transfer claim (Claim 1) is DENIED WITH PREJUDICE. The Trustee's cause of action to void the Deed in Lieu Agreement (Claim 2) is DISMISSED. The Court will hold a status conference on September 20, 2016 at 11:30 a.m. Counsel for the parties (and/or counsel) should report to Courtroom 1306 at the Thurgood Marshall U.S. Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, New York, NY 10007. ( Status Conference set for 9/20/2016 at 11:30 AM in Courtroom 1306, 40 Centre Street, New York, NY 10007 before Judge Andrew L. Carter Jr..) (Signed by Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr on 7/21/2016) (kgo)
|
|
Filing
76
OPINION & ORDER re: 65 MOTION to Dismiss The Second Amended Complaint. filed by Goldman Sachs Mortgage Company, MLQ DML Hotel, L.L.C., MLQ DML Restaurant, L.L.C., MLQ DML SPA, L.L.C.. For the reasons described herein, Defendant s' Motion to Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. (ECF No. 65.) The Trustee's cause of action to void the Deed in Lieu Agreement (Claim 2) is DISMISSED. Defendants' motion to dismiss the construc tive fraudulent transfer claim (Claim 1) is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. The Court also schedules a status conference for October 30, 2015 at 2:00 p.m. Counsel for the parties should report to Courtroom 1306 at the Thurgood Marshall U.S. Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, New York, NY 10007. (Signed by Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr on 9/29/2015) (kgo)
|
|
Filing
45
ORDER AND OPINION: Defendants' motion to dismiss the Amended Complaint (Dkt. No. 25) is GRANTED as to Claims 1, 3 and 4 and is DENIED as to Claim 2 for constructive fraudulent transfer under Utah law. The Court grants Plaintiff leave to amend Claim 4, following limited discovery, to remedy the stated deficiencies. (Signed by Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr on 9/30/2013) (js) Modified on 9/30/2013 (js).
|
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.
