Homeward Residential, Inc. v. Sand Canyon Corporation
| Homeward Residential, Inc. |
| Sand Canyon Corporation |
| 1:2012cv05067 |
| June 28, 2012 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| XX Out of State |
| Paul G. Gardephe |
| Other Contract |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
| None |
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
415
ORDER. The Court agrees that the documents described in the Declarations of Arnold Barnett and Walter Torous filed on January 14, 2021, should remain sealed for substantially the reasons stated in the Declarations. See ECF Nos. 411, 412. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 1/15/21) (yv)
|
|
Filing
397
ORDER. The Court agrees with the parties' proposed sealing and redaction requests for substantially the reasons articulated in their respective letters. Accordingly, no later than January 14, 2021: Plaintiff shall file the forty "Catego ry 1" documents it identifies without any redactions (and may convert Excel documents to PDF format as appropriate), Pl.'s Ltr. 2; Plaintiff shall file the two hundred ninety-seven "Category 2" documents (excluding those that are also Category 6 documents) with the limited redactions described (and may convert Excel documents to PDF format as appropriate), id. at 2-3; Plaintiff shall file the six "Category 3" documents with the redactions described, id. at 3 ; Defendant shall file the one hundred thirty-two documents it identifies in Table 4 without any redactions, Def.'s Ltr. 6; Defendant shall file the one hundred one documents it identifies in Table 3 with the minimal redactions described, id. at 5-6. Thus, the Court agrees that the two "Category 4" documents and five hundred ten "Category 5" documents identified by Plaintiff, Pl.'s Ltr. 4-11, and the seven hundred seventy-eight documents identified by Defendan t in Table 1 and forty documents identified in Table 2, Def.'s Ltr. 3-5, should remain sealed in their entirety. In addition, both parties identify documents that were filed under seal or in redacted form at the request of the opposing party, as to which the filing party does not take a position concerning confidentiality. See Pl.'s Ltr. 11-12 (identifying one hundred "Category 6" documents); Def.'s Ltr. 6 (identifying fifty-three documents in Table 5). The parties are ORDERED to confer regarding the disposition of these remaining documents. In its submissions on January 14, 2021, the filing party shall include any documents for which the party that initially designated the document confidential no longer bel ieves sealing or redactions are required (except to the extent that such document should be sealed or redacted for other reasons articulated by the filing party). That is, Plaintiff shall file any Category 6 documents in their entirety that Defend ant no longer believes should be confidential (except for those Category 6 documents that are also Category 2 documents which should be filed with the limited redactions described in Plaintiff's letter and those Category 6 documents that are also Category 5 documents, which should remain under seal), and Defendant shall file any Table 5 documents that Plaintiff no longer believes should be confidential. If either party believes that the documents described in this paragraph should rem ain under seal in whole or in part that is, if Plaintiff believes that any "Table 5" documents should remain under seal or if Defendant believes that any "Category 6" documents should remain under seal they shall file a lette r no later than January 4, 2021, identifying any such documents and articulating the basis upon which they should remain sealed. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 12/14/20) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:12-cv-05067-JMF-JLC, 1:12-cv-07319-JMF-JLC (yv)
|
|
Filing
390
ORDER granting 386 Letter Motion to Seal. No paper courtesy copies should be submitted to the Court, pursuant to the Court's Emergency Individual Rules and Practices. Defendant's motion is temporarily GRANTED. The court will decide whether to keep the materials under seal when deciding the underlying motions. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate ECF No. 386. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 3/18/2020) (ama)
|
|
Filing
379
ORDER temporarily granting 374 Letter Motion to Seal. The motion to seal is temporarily GRANTED. The Court will assess whether to keep the materials under seal when deciding the underlying motions. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate ECF No. 374. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 3/2/20) (yv)
|
|
Filing
372
ORDER temporarily granting 364 Letter Motion to Seal Document. The application is temporarily GRANTED. The Court will determine whether to keep the materials under seal when deciding the underlying motion. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate ECF No. 364. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 2/10/20) (yv)
|
|
Filing
361
ORDER granting 355 Motion to Seal Document. The motion to seal is temporarily GRANTED. The Court will determine whether to keep the materials under seal when deciding the underlying motion. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate ECF No. 355. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 1/21/2020) (ama)
|
|
Filing
353
MEMO ENDORSEMENT on 351 granting 345 Motion to Seal Document; granting 349 Motion to Seal Document; granting 351 Motion to Seal Document. ENDORSEMENT: The motions to seal, ECF Nos. 345, 349 & 351, are granted temporarily. The Court will assess whether to keep the materials at issue sealed or redacted when deciding the underlying motions. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate ECF Nos. 345, 349, and 351. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 12/9/2019) (rro) Transmission to Sealed Records Clerk for processing.
|
|
Filing
335
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: For the reasons stated above, Homeward's motion to disqualify Olasov was DENIED. Additionally, within one week of the date of this Memorandum Opinion and Order, the parties shall file unsealed and unredacted vers ions of all documents previously filed under seal or in redacted form (except for redactions of all but the last four digits of mortgage loan numbers contained in ECF No. 311-5 in accordance with Rule 5.2(a)(4)). SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 10/31/2019) (ks)
|
|
Filing
289
OPINION AND ORDER. For the reasons above, Homeward's motion for reconsideration of the Court's November 13 Order denying permission to prove Sand Canyon's liability via statistical sampling and to admit Dr. Cowan's sampling testim ony is DENIED. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to terminate the motion docketed at ECF No. 282. SO ORDERED. re: 282 MOTION for Reconsideration re; 272 Memorandum & Opinion filed by Homeward Residential, Inc. (Signed by Judge John F. Keenan on 5/22/2018) (rjm)
|
|
Filing
288
OPINION & ORDER re: (190 in 1:12-cv-05067-JFK-JLC) MOTION to Intervene filed by LBF International II LLC, LBF International I LLC; (167 in 1:12-cv-07319-JFK-JLC) MOTION to Intervene filed by LBF International II L LC, BDC Credit LLC, LBF International I LLC. For the reasons stated above, Movants' motions to intervene are DENIED. The Clerk of the Court is respectfully directed to close the motions docketed at ECF No. 190 in Case No. 12 Civ. 5067 and ECF No. 167 in Case No. 12 Civ. 7319, and to terminate LBF International I LLC, LBF International II LLC, and BOC Credit LLC as parties to these actions. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge John F. Keenan on 2/12/2018) (anc)
|
|
Filing
272
OPINION & ORDER: For the reasons above, Homeward' s motion for permission to prove Sand Canyon's liability via statistical sampling and to admit Dr. Cowan's sampling testimony is DENIED. The Court, having concluded that the Governing Agreements, as relevant here, call for loan-by-loan proof of breaches of representations and warranties, declines to reach the parties' remaining arguments. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge John F. Keenan on 11/13/2017) (anc)
|
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: Homeward Residential, Inc. v. Sand Canyon Corporation | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Homeward Residential, Inc. | |
| Represented By: | Stephen Roy Blacklocks |
| Represented By: | Brian V Otero |
| 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: Sand Canyon Corporation | |
| Represented By: | James K. Goldfarb |
| Represented By: | Robert M. Stern |
| 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.
