Leong v. The Goldman Sachs Group Inc.
| Oei Hong Leong |
| The Goldman Sachs Group Inc. |
| 1:2013cv08655 |
| December 5, 2013 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| New York |
| Jesse M. Furman |
| Other Fraud |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 |
| Defendant |
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
55
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER re: 34 MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order . MOTION for Permanent Injunction filed by The Goldman Sachs Group Inc.: For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff is hereby enjoined from proceedin g with the CFTC reparations proceeding and directed to submit any dispute arising out of the parties' agreement to the London Court of International Arbitration, in accordance with this Court's prior Opinion and Order. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate Docket No. 34. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 5/2/2016) (tn)
|
|
Filing
50
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: For the reasons set forth within Plaintiff's request that the Court recuse itself from this case is denied, and the Court will consider Defendant's pending motion for injunctive relief in due course. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 3/18/2016) (ab)
|
|
Filing
33
OPINION AND ORDER re: 23 MOTION to Strike Document No. 20 Declaration of Lee Ronald Suk Bae. filed by Oei Hong Leong, 2 LETTER MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer Until After Certain Threshold Issues are Resolved ad dressed to Judge Jesse M. Furman from Hillary Richard dated 12/11/2013. filed by The Goldman Sachs Group Inc., 18 MOTION to Stay in Favor of Arbitration or, Alternatively, to Dismiss or Stay in Favor of a Foreign Proceeding. filed by The Goldman Sachs Group Inc., 24 MOTION to Strike Document No. 21 Declaration of David Joseph QC. filed by Oei Hong Leong. Defendant's motion for a stay pending arbitration to take place at the London Court of International Arbitr ation is GRANTED. Plaintiff's motions to strike are DENIED. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate Docket Numbers 2, 18, 23, and 24. Further, as there is no reason to keep the case open pending the arbitration, the Clerk of Court is dire cted to administratively close the case without prejudice to either party moving by letter motion to reopen the case within 30 days of the conclusion of the arbitration proceedings. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 6/25/2014) (kgo)
|
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: Leong v. The Goldman Sachs Group Inc. | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Oei Hong Leong | |
| Represented By: | Alan Todd Friedman |
| Represented By: | Peter J. McNulty |
| Represented By: | Brett L. Rosenthal |
| 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: The Goldman Sachs Group Inc. | |
| Represented By: | Charles Anthony Michael |
| Represented By: | Hillary Richard |
| 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.
