Indymac Bank, F.S.B. v. Barth Sullivan Behr, LLP et al
Indymac Bank, F.S.B. |
Barth Sullivan Behr, LLP, Lawrence D. Behr, Philip C. Barth, III, Anita Perry, Taiwan Industries and Xu Yu |
1:2008cv00476 |
June 27, 2008 |
US District Court for the Western District of New York |
Fraud or Truth-In-Lending Office |
XX US, Outside State |
Richard J. Arcara |
Hugh B. Scott |
Both |
Diversity |
28:1332 Diversity-Fraud |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 61 ORDER granting 20 Motion to Dismiss; granting 35 Motion to Dismiss; adopting Report and Recommendation re 59 . Case is referred back to Magistrate Judge Scott for further proceedings. Signed by Hon. Richard J. Arcara on 9/25/2009. (JMB) (Additional attachment(s) added on 9/24/2009: # 1 order) (JMB). |
Filing 59 MAGISTRATE JUDGE HUGH B. SCOTTAMENDED REPORT & RECOMMENDATIONSRe 35 MOTION to Dismiss Amended Counterclaim filed by Indymac Bank, F.S.B., 20 MOTION to Dismiss Counterclaim filed by Indymac Bank, F.S.B.It is recommended that plaintiff's initial motion to dismiss (Docket No. 20) be deemed moot and plaintiff's second motion to dismiss the amended counterclaim be granted and the amended counterclaim dismissed. Objections due ten days from receipt. Motions terminated: 39 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 35 MOTION to Dismiss Amended Counterclaim filed by Indymac Bank, F.S.B., 20 MOTION to Dismiss Counterclaim filed by Indymac Bank, F.S.B.So Ordered. Signed by Hon. Hugh B. Scott on 9/17/2009. (DRH) |
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 Western 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.