Innovatus Capital Partners, LLC v. Neuman et al
Plaintiff: Innovatus Capital Partners, LLC
Defendant: Jonathan Neuman, Antony Mitchell, Ritz Advisors, LLC, Greg Williams, Daryl Clark and Amanda Zachman
Case Number: 1:2018cv04252
Filed: May 11, 2018
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of New York
Office: Foley Square Office
County: New York
Presiding Judge: Louis L. Stanton
Nature of Suit: Other Contract
Cause of Action: 28:1332
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
October 14, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 106 ORDER denying 101 Letter Motion to Seal. I have determined each of these items in detail, and find none of them - submitted to affect the determination of a motion for summary judgment presents a "most compelling reason " to seal it from public access. See Lingosch at 123. This application is denied. The birthdates are to be redacted. (Signed by Judge Louis L. Stanton on 10/14/2020) (rro)
September 2, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 96 ORDER: The issues raised in counsels' July 31, August 24, August 27, August 31, and September 1 letters are disposed of as follows: MV Realty has leave to make a single motion for summary judgment on any and all grounds available to it withou t a pre-motion conference. To the extent MV Realty requests a stay, the request is denied. After a careful item- by- item consideration by the Court, all items listed by Innovatus in the Schottland Declaration verified July 24, 2020 must be unseal ed and publicly filed without redactions, with the exceptions of INNOV0000087, INNOV0000089, INNOV0000096-0000097, INNOV0000102, INNOV0000718-0000730, INNOV0003959-0003960, which may be redacted from the public file. The penultimate sentence in the paragraph continuing on page 13 of that Declaration may redact three words, so it reads, "The [XXX] came from Innovatus." (Signed by Judge Louis L. Stanton on 9/2/2020) (rro)
June 22, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 85 ORDER: The issues raised in counsel's letters to the Court of May 18, June 3 and 18 (Covington) and May 22 and June 8 (Reitler) are resolved as follows: All discovery by Innovatus is stayed until 10 days after it submits to MV Realty the defi nition of confidential material required by the May 28, 2020 Order. MV Realty may proceed with discovery directed to the issue of entry by others into RTL ("Right to List") agreements, particularly as related to the issue whether knowledge of such agreements was "generally available in the public" (NOA Article II). So ordered. (Signed by Judge Louis L. Stanton on 6/22/2020) (rro)
May 28, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 81 ORDER re: (70 in 1:18-cv-04252-LLS): The issue raised by MV Realty's counsel's letter to the Court dated April 27, 2020, which has been the subject of various applications, inquiries, and discovery processes by MV Realty and evasions by I nnovatus for years, is overdue for resolution. It is time for Innovatus to furnish the defendants in the case it brought with a clear, meaningful and reliable statement defining the confidential information it claims to have provided to those defenda nts. That requires separating what is confidential from what is not. For example, it would be hard to maintain that the language used in the RTL agreement is confidential since it is disclosed to every buyer who signs the agreement and is free to di scuss it with others. But there may be confidential reasons why those particular words were used: those reasons must be specified (which may be done privately under the litigation's confidentiality agreement) if they are to be part of the claime d Confidentiality Information.The statement must be comprehensive. It must disclose each item and element of the Business Opportunity and, with specificity, every other item of information claimed to be confidential. Whatever is not set forth cannot later be claimedto have been confidential. Terms of reservation such as "among others" or of a right to supplement are unacceptable: they destroy the purpose of having a complete list, render the statement ineffective, and subject any claim based onConfidential Information to dismissal. (Signed by Judge Louis L. Stanton on 5/28/2020) (ml)
May 11, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 75 PROTECTIVE ORDER...regarding procedures to be followed that shall govern the handling of confidential material... (Signed by Judge Louis L. Stanton on 5/11/2020) (rro)
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

Search for this case: Innovatus Capital Partners, LLC v. Neuman et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Innovatus Capital Partners, LLC
Represented By: Samuel Neil Fraidin
Represented By: Peter R. Jerdee
Represented By: Gregory P. Joseph
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: Jonathan Neuman
Represented By: Jason Raofield
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: Antony Mitchell
Represented By: Jason Raofield
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: Ritz Advisors, LLC
Represented By: Jason Raofield
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: Greg Williams
Represented By: Jason Raofield
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: Daryl Clark
Represented By: Jason Raofield
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: Amanda Zachman
Represented By: Jason Raofield
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.


Why Is My Information Online?