Hertz Corporation v. Accenture LLP
| 1:2019cv03508 |
| October 25, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| Contract: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 bc Diversity-Breach of Contract |
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
93
ORDER: For the reasons stated on the record: The parties shall meet and confer regarding the possibility of conducting electronic review of the source code at issue in this case, and as further set forth in this order. (Signed by Judge William H. Pauley, III on 5/18/2020) (jwh)
|
|
Filing
86
ORDER: The April 3, 2020 teleconference is rescheduled from 12:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. (Telephone Conference set for 4/3/2020 at 03:00 PM before Judge William H. Pauley III.) (Signed by Judge William H. Pauley, III on 4/2/2020) (jwh)
|
|
Filing
79
ORDER re: 77 Letter, filed by Accenture LLP: For the foregoing reasons, the Court denies without prejudice Accenture's requests (1) to increase the number of depositions that it takes from 10 to 20, and (2) to depose trial witnesses who were not previously deposed. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Stewart D. Aaron on 3/9/2020) (Aaron, Stewart)
|
|
Filing
62
SCHEDULING ORDER: In view of Accenture's Motion to Compel IBM to Comply with Accenture's Subpoena (ECF No. 61), this Court hereby fixes the following schedule: IBM shall file its opposition to Accenture's motion by December 6, 20 19. Accenture shall file any reply by December 9, 2019. Accenture is further directed to serve IBM with a copy of this Order forthwith and note service on the docket. Set Deadlines/Hearing as to 61 MOTION to Comply with Accenture LLP's Subpoena to International Business Machines (Responses due by 12/6/2019, Replies due by 12/9/2019.) (Signed by Judge William H. Pauley, III on 12/2/2019) (rro)
|
|
Filing
46
MEMORANDUM & ORDER granting in part and denying in part 29 Motion to Dismiss: For the foregoing reasons, Accenture's motion to dismiss is granted in part and denied in part. Hertz's FDUTPA claim is dismissed with prejudice. This Court, h owever, declines to determine-at least at this stagewhether the Consulting Services Agreement limits the damages available to Hertz for its breach of contract claim. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate the motion pending at ECF No. 29. (Signed by Judge William H. Pauley, III on 10/25/2019) (jwh)
|
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: Hertz Corporation v. Accenture LLP | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | 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.
