v. Wolfe
| Eric Wolf |
| 1:2015mc00290 |
| September 11, 2015 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| New York |
| Part One |
| Other |
| M 77 Application to have subpoena issued to person living in this district re: action in foreign cou |
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
22
OPINION AND ORDER. For the reasons discussed above, the § 1782 application to depose Eric Wolf is granted. The deposition should take place on or before October 5, 2015. re: 1 MOTION Ex Parte Petition and Request for Expedited Ruling. filed by In re: Application of 000 Promneftstroy for an Order to Conduct Discovery for Use in a Foreign Proceeding. (Signed by Judge John G. Koeltl on 10/2/2015) (rjm)
|
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: v. Wolfe | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant: Eric Wolf | |
| Represented By: | Robert Maxwell Andalman |
| Represented By: | Jonathan Frank Hollis |
| 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.
