Commerzbank AG v. Bank of New York Mellon
| Commerzbank AG |
| Bank of New York Mellon |
| 1:2015cv10029 |
| December 23, 2015 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| XX Out of U.S. |
| George B. Daniels |
| Other Statutory Actions |
| 15 U.S.C. ยง 77 |
| Plaintiff |
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
367
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER denying 359 Motion for Entry of Judgment under Rule 54(b); denying 361 Motion re: 359 MOTION for Entry of Judgment under Rule 54(b) ., 361 MOTION to clarify or reconsider the Courts Memorand um Decision and Order (Dkt. 358) re: 358 Memorandum & Opinion,,, . Plaintiffs motion for entry of partial final judgment (ECF No. 359) is DENIED, and Defendants' motion for clarification or reconsideration is DENIED. The Clerk of Court is directed to close the motions at ECF Nos. 359 and 361. SO ORDERED.. (Signed by Judge George B. Daniels on 3/27/2024) (ks)
|
|
Filing
358
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER: Plaintiff's motion for partial summary judgment, (ECF No. 268), is DENIED. Defendants' cross-motion for summary judgment, (ECF No. 272), is GRANTED on the basis of standing and statute of limitations as to all claims except those pertaining to the 13 Unsold Barrington II Certificates. Defendants' cross-motion for summary judgment is also GRANTED as to all TIAclaims (Count I), breach of contract claims (Count II) arising from pre-EOD duties to notify and pre-EOD repurchase obligations, and negligence claims (Count IV). For the 13 Unsold Barrington II Certificates, Defendants' cross-motion for summary judgment on the breach of contract claims (Count II) arising from pre-EOD duties to investigate, the alleged occurrence of EODs, and post-EODprudent person duties is DENIED. The Clerk of Court is directed to keep this case open and remove it from the suspense docket. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge George B. Daniels on 8/28/2023) (ama)
|
|
Filing
344
ORDER The December 15, 2022 oral argument on the motions for summary judgment is adjourned until March 7, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. SO ORDERED. (Oral Argument set for 3/7/2023 at 10:00 AM before Judge George B. Daniels.) (Signed by Judge George B. Daniels on 11/21/2022) (jca)
|
|
Filing
342
ORDER: Parties in the above-captioned case are directed to appear before this Court on December 15, 2022 at 9:45 a.m. for oral argument on the motions for summary judgment. No later than December 8, 2022, each party may file supplemental briefing, in accordance with Local Civil Rule 11.1, of no more than five pages to present case-law developments since original summary judgment filings. SO ORDERED., ( Oral Argument set for 12/15/2022 at 09:45 AM before Judge George B. Daniels.) (Signed by Judge George B. Daniels on 11/09/2022) (ama)
|
|
Filing
338
ORDER: The above-captioned inactive case is hereby stayed and placed on the suspense docket. (Signed by Judge George B. Daniels on 9/30/2020) (jwh)
|
|
Filing
335
ORDER: In light of the above-captioned action being placed on the suspense docket, the Clerk of Court is hereby directed to close Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgement, (ECF No. 268), and Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgement, (ECF No. 272). These motions may be reopened once the above-captioned action is restored to the main docket. SO ORDERED. Motions terminated: 268 MOTION for Summary Judgment, filed by Commerzbank AG; 272 MOTION for Summary Judgment, filed by Bank of New York Mellon, The Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company, N.A. (Signed by Judge George B. Daniels on 3/24/2020) (va)
|
|
Filing
325
ORDER denying 322 Letter Motion for Discovery. Plaintiff's request for reconsideration is DENIED for substantially the reasons set forth in defendants' letter dated January 10, 2020. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara C. Moses on 1/15/2020) (cf)
|
|
Filing
320
ORDER: Plaintiff's challenge to certain of defendants' privilege designations (Dkt. No. 169) implicates significantly broader issues than defendants' corresponding challenge (Dkt. No. 167, resolved at Dkt. No 317), and se eks the production of many more documents. Given the pendency of the parties' fully-briefed summary judgment motions (Dkt. Nos. 268, 272), which are scheduled for oral argument on February 13, 2020, the Court has concluded that it would be inefficient to rule on plaintiff's privilege challenges at this time. A grant of summary judgment, even as to limited claims or defenses, could render some or all of the withheld documents irrelevant to any issue still in dispute, and conse quently moot the privilege challenge as to those documents. Plaintiff may renew its challenge by submitting a letter, within 30 days of the decision on the summary judgment motions, identifying which of the documents withheld or redacted on privilege grounds are relevant to the claims and defenses remaining to be tried, and consequently which of its challenges it wishes to press. Defendants may respond within one week. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara C. Moses on 1/6/2020) (mro)
|
|
Filing
317
ORDER: Defendants' challenge to certain of plaintiff's privilege designations (Dkt. No. 167) is resolved as follows: The documents logged at Entries 13, 14, 22, 345, and 743 were properly withheld or redacted. The email logged at Entry 28 51 should be produced in redacted form rather than withheld entirely. The cover email from "Matt" to "Vijay" is not privileged. However, plaintiff may redact, as privileged, all text below the dotted line on page 1, except for the heading "Recommendation," on page two, and the first bullet point under that heading. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara C. Moses on 12/20/2019) (cf)
|
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
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.
