International Cards Company, Ltd. v. Mastercard International Inc.
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|Date Filed||#||Document Text|
|August 17, 2017
MEMORANDUM AND OPINION re: 293 MOTION for Attorney Fees and Costs in the Amount of $4,664,331.38 filed by International Cards Company, Ltd., 322 AMENDED MOTION for Attorney Fees and Costs filed by International Ca rds Company, Ltd: Plaintiff International Cards Company, Ltd. ("ICC") sued Defendant MasterCard International Inc. ("MasterCard") for breach of contract, among other claims. On the eve of trial, and almost four years after ICC br ought suit, MasterCard filed its third motion for summary judgment on the contract claim based on an interpretation of the contract MasterCard had not previously advanced. The Court granted the motion. ICC moves for sanctions pursuant to the Court 39;s inherent authority and 28 U.S.C. § 1927, arguing that MasterCard must pay more than $4.6 million in attorneys' fees and expenses that ICC allegedly incurred because MasterCard did not raise the dispositive contract interpretation earlier. For the foregoing reasons, ICC's motion for sanctions is DENIED. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to close the motions at Docket Numbers 293 and 322. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 8/17/2017) (jwh)
|March 24, 2017
OPINION AND ORDER re: 274 MOTION for Summary Judgment Dismissing ICCs Breach of Contract Claim. filed by Mastercard International Inc. For the foregoing reasons, MasterCard's motion is GRANTED, and ICC's breach of contract claim is dismissed. In light of the dismissal, by March 28, 2017, at 5:00 p.m., the parties must submit revised versions of (1) their respective statements of the case (i.e., the short summary to be included in the voir dire and preliminary charge ) and (2) a revised witness list and exhibit list. The parties shall advise the Court as soon as possible, and no later than March 25, 2016, whether any of the 5 exhibits submitted for an in limine ruling on admissibility is withdrawn in light of this Opinion. In addition, each party's total time allotted for trial, not including closing argument, is reduced from eight (8) hours to six-and-a-half (6.5) hours. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to close the motion at Docket Number 274. (As further set forth in this Order.) (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 3/24/2017) (cf)
|November 29, 2016
OPINION AND ORDER re: 167 MOTION to Exclude Expert Testimony and Reports of Kaushik Gopal and Anthony Creamer . filed by International Cards Company, Ltd., 147 MOTION for Summary Judgment As To Damages. filed by Ma stercard International Inc., 164 MOTION MasterCard International Incorporated's Motion to Exclude the Testimony and Report of Pamela O'Neill . filed by Mastercard International Inc.. For the foregoing reasons, MasterCard& #039;s motion for summary judgment is GRANTED with respect to ICC's Additional Issuing/Acquiring Opportunities damages and ICC's Additional Third-Party Processing Opportunities damages related to InvestBank and Jordan Commercial Bank and DENIED in all other aspects. MasterCard's motion to exclude O'Neill's report and testimony is GRANTED with respect to the damages on which summary judgment has been granted and DENIED in all other aspects. ICC's motion to exclude MasterCards the report and testimony of experts Gopal and Creamer is DENIED. The Clerk of Court is directed to close the motions at Docket Numbers 147, 164 and 167. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 11/29/2016) (kgo)
|May 26, 2016
OPINION AND ORDER re: 122 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Mastercard International Inc. For the foregoing reasons, Defendant's motion for summary judgment is GRANTED with respect to ICC's claim for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, but DENIED as to all other claims. The Clerk of Court is directed to close the motion at Docket No. 122. (Signed by Judge Lorna G. Schofield on 5/26/2016) (ama)
Access additional case information on PACER
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
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.
Why Is My Information Online?