GW Holdings Group, LLC v. US Highland, Inc.
| GW Holdings Group, LLC |
| US Highland, Inc. |
| 1:2018cv04997 |
| June 5, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| Kings |
| John F. Keenan |
| Stockholders Suits |
| 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
96
DEFAULT JUDGMENT: THEREFORE, it is ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED: That the Court enters judgment in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendant for the amount of $200,079.74 in damages on the First Note and the Second Note, plus per diem defaul t interest after May 25, 2018 through entry of judgment at the rate of 24% at the per diem amount of $62.55 on the First Note in the amount of $62,424.90 plus per diem default interest after June 1, 2018 on the Second Note through e ntry of judgment at the rate of24% at the per diem amount of $44.84 in the amount of $44,436.44 pursuant to the cross-default provision in the Second Note, and that, in accordance with Section 4 of the Notes, Plaintiff shall have the option to convert the First Note and the Second Note into shares of stock of Defendant up until the amount of damages awarded under the First Note and the Second Note in accordance with the terms of the First Note and the Second Note, and attorneys' fees in the amount of $41,607.80 and that Plaintiff shall have execution therefore. (As further set forth in this Order.) (Signed by Judge John F. Keenan on 2/16/2021) (cf)
|
|
Filing
81
ORDER: NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: If Defendant, having a last known business address at 208 East 51 st Street #208, New York, New York 10022, does not appear in this action through new counsel by November 30, 2020, this Court shall Order entry of a Default Judgment against Defendant. (As further set forth in this Order.) (Signed by Judge John F. Keenan on 11/17/2020) (cf)
|
|
Filing
79
ORDER: A status conference is set for November 10, 2020 at 11:30 a.m. in Courtroom 20-C. The purpose of this conference is to discuss the status of this case. So Ordered. (Status Conference set for 11/10/2020 at 11:30 AM in Courtroom 20C, 500 Pearl Street, New York, NY 10007 before Judge John F. Keenan.) (Signed by Judge John F. Keenan on 9/29/2020) (js)
|
|
Filing
73
ORDER: By no later than July 20, 2020, the parties are directed to confer and file a joint letter regarding whether either party requests oral argument on Defendant's motion to dismiss (ECF No. 47) or Plaintiff's motion for partial summar y judgment (ECF No.50). The Court does not require such argument, but if it is requested, the parties are further directed to provide the Court with at least three proposed dates for the argument on the Tuesdays, Wednesdays, and Thursdays between August 18, 2020, andSeptember 3, 2020. (Signed by Judge John F. Keenan on 7/13/2020) (cf)
|
|
Filing
62
ORDER: Accordingly, Steidley's motion to withdraw is GRANTED. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate Jeffrey W. Steidley and Gage S. Fender from Defendant's representation in this action. The current briefing schedule (ECF No. 58), w hich gives Defendant until June 17, 2020, to make certain filings relating to its motion to dismiss and Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment, remains in effect. (As further set forth in this Order.) Attorney Gage Sterling Fender and Jeffrey Wayne Steidley terminated. (Signed by Judge John F. Keenan on 4/17/2020) (cf)
|
|
Filing
46
ORDER. The oral argument in this case has been rescheduled from April 22, 2020 to Friday, April 24, 2020 at 11:00 a.m. in Courtroom 20-C. So ordered. (Oral Argument set for 4/24/2020 at 11:00 AM in Courtroom 20C, 500 Pearl Street, New York, NY 10007 before Judge John F. Keenan.) (Signed by Judge John F. Keenan on 1/21/2020) (rjm)
|
|
Filing
42
ORDER, As discussed during today's conference, the parties have agreed to the following briefing schedule: Plaintiff's amended complaint is due by January 6, 2020. Defendant's motion to dismiss ("MTD") the amended complaint is due by January 27, 2020. Plaintiff's MTD opposition and Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment ("SJ") are due by February 20, 2020. Defendant's MTD reply and Defendant's SJ opposition are due by March 19, 2020. P laintiff's SJ reply is due by April 2, 2020. Oral argument on the MTD and SJ motion will be heard on April 22, 2020 at 11 a.m. in Courtroom 20-C. Each side will have at total of 30 minutes to argue both motions.SO ORDERED. (Amended Pleadings due by 1/6/2020., Motions due by 1/27/2020., Responses due by 3/19/2020, Replies due by 4/2/2020., Oral Argument set for 4/22/2020 at 11:00 AM in Courtroom 20C, 500 Pearl Street, New York, NY 10007 before Judge John F. Keenan.) (Signed by Judge John F. Keenan on 12/30/19) (yv)
|
|
Filing
36
ORDER: A status conference is set for December 30, 2019 at 11:00 a.m. in Courtroom 20-C. The purpose of the conference is to discuss the plaintiff's motion for leave to file an amended complaint. (Status Conference set for 12/30/2019 at 11:00 AM in Courtroom 20C, 500 Pearl Street, New York, NY 10007 before Judge John F. Keenan.) (Signed by Judge John F. Keenan on 12/16/2019) (cf)
|
|
Filing
31
OPINION & ORDER re: 30 LETTER MOTION for Leave to File Amended Complaint addressed to Judge John F. Keenan from Jeffrey Fleischmann dated March 19, 2019 filed by GW Holdings Group, LLC. The Court hereby holds that it is divest ed of the jurisdiction to decide Plaintiff's pending motion for leave to amend (ECF No. 30) as (1) resolving that motion would control aspects of the case involved in the appeal (see Kilpatrick v. Henkin, 17-CV-5111 (CM), 2018 WL 1684410, at * 1 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 5, 2018) (citing Griggs v. Provident Consumer Discount Co., 459 U.S. 56, 58 (1982))) and (2) it is not one of the motions that Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a) (4) allows the Court to resolve after a notice of appeal has been filed. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge John F. Keenan on 5/16/2019) (anc)
|
|
Filing
27
OPINION & ORDER re: 11 MOTION to Dismiss PURSUANT TO FED. R. CIV. P. 12(b)(6) filed by US Highland, Inc. For the reasons stated above, Defendant's motion to dismiss Plaintiff's complaint is GRANTED. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to terminate the motion docketed at ECF No. 11 and close this case. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge John F. Keenan on 3/13/2019) (anc) Transmission to Orders and Judgments Clerk for processing.
|
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: GW Holdings Group, LLC v. US Highland, Inc. | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: GW Holdings Group, LLC | |
| Represented By: | Jeffrey Fleischmann |
| 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: US Highland, Inc. | |
| Represented By: | Gage Sterling Fender |
| Represented By: | Jeffrey Wayne Steidley |
| Represented By: | Matthew Tracy |
| 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.
