Firestar Diamond, Inc. et al v. Modi et al
1:2022cv05250 |
June 28, 2022 |
US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
Foley Square Office |
Bankruptcy Withdrawal |
28 U.S.C. ยง 157 Motion to Withdraw Reference |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 3 ORDER: Counsel for the plaintiffs in the above captioned actions filed a related case statement in Case No. 22-cv-5293. (See Docket No. 3). To determine whether the cases should be designated as related, the court hereby orders that the parties tha t commenced the two underlying adversary proceedings - Adv. Proc. No. 19-1102 (SHL) and Adv. Proc. No. 20-1052 (SHL) - advise the court about the nature of these two disputes, how they differ, why the parties are different, and precisely what about t hese two cases makes them "related" within the meaning of the Rules for the Division of Business Among Judges. I need considerably more detail than was provided in the related case statement. Those parties have 48 hours - until 5 pm on Thursday, June 30 - to respond to this order. (Signed by Judge Colleen McMahon on 6/28/2022) (vfr) |
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: Firestar Diamond, Inc. et al v. Modi et al | |
---|---|
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.