SGM Holdings LLC et al v. Andrews et al
| SGM Holdings LLC, Richard Featherly, Lawrence Field, Premier Natural Resources LLC and Syndicated Geo Management Corporation |
| A James Andrews, Richard Gaines and Karl Schledwitz |
| 1:2015cv08142 |
| October 15, 2015 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| XX Out of State |
| Paul A. Crotty |
| Other Fraud |
| 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
91
ORDER. Plaintiffs' Request is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. By August 22, 2022, Defendants shall produce the Non-Privileged Documents and the Partially Privileged Documents as instructed in this Order. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Sarah L Cave on 8/17/22) (yv)
|
|
Filing
87
ORDER terminating 83 Letter Motion for Discovery. Accordingly, the Court orders as follows: 1. Plaintiffs' request for an order directing Defendants to review the Materials for communications concerning the July 14, 2015 and O ctober 20, 2015 letters is DENIED. Despite having the opportunity to raise these letters at the Conference or in the two weeks after the Court issued the June 3 Order, Plaintiffs failed to do so. See Favors v. Cuomo, No. 11 Civ. 5632 (DLI) (RR) (G EL), 2013 WL 12358269, at *4 (E.D.N.Y. Aug. 27, 2013) (denying party's request to produce documents where the party made "noattempt to show 'good cause' for failing to timely raise, within the period specified in the Court's [] Order, its objection to discovery" of the documents); David v. Weinstein Co. LLC, No. 18 Civ. 5414 (RA), 2020 WL 4042773, at *4 (S.D.N.Y. July 17, 2020) (noting that "the Second Circuit and courts within this Circuit have ro utinely held that failure to file objections to a magistrate judge's order in a timely manner operates as a waiver of such objections") (citing O'Neal v. Spota, 744 F. App'x 35, 37 (2d Cir. 2018)). 2. By July 6, 2022, Defendan ts shall email the Challenged Documents (i.e., Privilege Log entry nos. 20-76) to Chambers (Cave_NYSDChambers@nysd.uscourts.gov) for the Court's in camera review. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Sarah L Cave on 7/5/2022) (tg)
|
|
Filing
84
ORDER. By June 24, 2022, Plaintiffs shall a letter no longer than three (3) pages in length identifying any documents on the Privilege Log as to which Plaintiffs challenge the asserted justification for non-disclosure and explaining the basis of their challenge (the Letter). If Plaintiffs file the Letter, then by July 1, 2022, Defendants shall (i) file a response to the Letter of no longer than three (3) pages in length, and (ii) email to Chambers (Cave_NYSDChambers@nysd.uscourts.gov) copies of the challenged documents for the Courts in camera review. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Sarah L Cave on 6/14/22) (yv)
|
|
Filing
82
ORDER: Pursuant to the discovery conference held today, June 3, 2022, to discuss Plaintiffs' request (ECF No. 74) for an order compelling Defendants to provide a "detailed" log of the emails and documents that Defendants withheld a s privileged (the "Materials"), the Court orders as follows: 1. Defendants shall promptly review the Materials (the "Review") to determine the number of documents or emails falling under each of the following categories: (i ) communications sent to or received by Defendant Karl Schledwitz; (ii) communications containing or referencing comments made by Mr. Schledwitz regarding any documents filed in the matter DNV Inv. P'ship v. Regent Priv. Cap., LLC, No. 15 Ci v. 1255 (PAC) (SLC); and (iii) communications concerning the March 18, 2015 Letter (see ECF No. 63-4 at 2-3). 2. By June 10, 2022, Defendants shall file a letter advising the Court of the results of the Review (the "Letter"). 3. On receipt of the Letter, the Court will determine the nature of the privilege log that Defendants must provide to Plaintiffs. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Sarah L Cave on 6/3/2022) (vfr)
|
|
Filing
75
TELEPHONE CONFERENCE SCHEDULING ORDER granting 74 Letter Motion for Conference re: 74 LETTER MOTION for Conference addressed to Magistrate Judge Sarah L. Cave from Dan J. Schulman dated May 13, 2022. LETTER MOTION for Discovery Conference addressed to Magistrate Judge Sarah L. Cave from Dan J. Schulman dated May 13, 2022. ; granting 74 Letter Motion for Discovery. Plaintiffs' letter-motion for a discovery conference (ECF No. 74 (the "Letter-Motion" )) is GRANTED. A telephone conference to discuss the issues raised in the Letter-Motion is scheduled for Friday, June 3, 2022 at 2:00 pm. The parties are directed to call: (866) 390-1828; access code: 380-9799, at the scheduled time. Per the Court 's Individual Practices, by May 18, 2022, Defendants shall file a response to the Letter-Motion. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to close ECF No. 74. SO ORDERED. ( Telephone Conference set for 6/3/2022 at 02:00 PM before Magistrate Judge Sarah L Cave.). (Signed by Magistrate Judge Sarah L Cave on 5/13/22) (yv)
|
|
Filing
73
ORDER. By May 13, 2022, the parties shall order the transcripts of the March 1, 2022 and May 11, 2022 conferences before the Honorable Paul A. Crotty (see ECF min. entries Mar. 1, 2022 & May 11, 2022), and promptly file the transcripts on the docket. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Sarah L Cave on 5/12/22) (yv)
|
|
Filing
67
ORDER: Should Plaintiffs wish to continue seeking disclosure of these materials, the parties are directed to meet and confer concerning: 1. Any available avenues to resolve this discovery dispute without judicial intervention; 2. Should such eff orts fail, a timetable for Defendants to prepare and produce a detailed privilege log that will allow Plaintiffs to meaningfully assess and, where applicable, challenge the asserted justification for non-disclosure of each withheld document; 3. If applicable, a timetable for Plaintiffs' motion to compel to be presented at a pre-motion conference, filed, and briefed-a briefing that would presumably cover the proper privilege law to be applied in this case, the relevant work product standards, and the application of both doctrines to the unique circumstances presented in this action. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Paul A. Crotty on 3/23/2022) (va)
|
|
Filing
59
PROTECTIVE ORDER...regarding procedures to be followed that shall govern the handling of confidential material...SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Paul A. Crotty on 8/10/2021) (vfr)
|
|
Filing
35
OPINION & ORDER re: 20 MOTION to Dismiss OR, ALTERNATIVELY, TO TRANSFER THE MATTER TO THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE. filed by Karl Schledwitz, A James Andrews, Richard Gaines. CONCLUSION: For the foregoing reasons, Defendants m otion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, improper venue, and failure to state a claim, and, in the alternative to transfer the action to the Western District of Tennessee, is denied. The Clerk is directed to close the motion at Docket 20. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Paul A. Crotty on 1-12-17) (mov)
|
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.
