Cases 1 - 7 of 7
Global Industrial Investment Limited et al v. 1955 Capital Fund I GP LLC et al
as 4:2021cv08924
Petitioner:
GLOBAL INDUSTRIAL INVESTMENT LIMITED and China Fortune Land Development
Respondent:
1955 Capital Fund I GP LLC and 1955 Capital China Fund GP LLC
Interested Party:
Andrew Chung
Cause Of Action: 27 U.S.C. § 185 Enforcement of Arbitration Award
GLOBAL INDUSTRIAL INVESTMENT LIMITED et al v. 1955 Capital Fund I GP LLC et al
as 3:2021cv08916
Petitioner:
GLOBAL INDUSTRIAL INVESTMENT LIMITED and China Fortune Land Development
Respondent:
1955 Capital Fund I GP LLC and 1955 Capital China Fund GP LLC
Cause Of Action: 27 U.S.C. § 185
v. GLOBAL INDUSTRIAL INVESTMENT LIMITED et al
as 3:2021cv08911
Respondent:
1955 Capital Fund I GP LLC and 1955 Capital China Fund GP LLC
Claimant:
GLOBAL INDUSTRIAL INVESTMENT LIMITED and China Fortune Land Development
Cause Of Action: 27 U.S.C. § 185
v. GLOBAL INDUSTRIAL INVESTMENT LIMITED et al
as 3:2021mc80267
Respondent:
1955 Capital Fund I GP LLC and 1955 Capital China Fund GP LLC
Claimant:
GLOBAL INDUSTRIAL INVESTMENT LIMITED and China Fortune Land Development
Cause Of Action: 27 U.S.C. § 185
China Fortune Land Development et al v. 1955 Capital Fund I GP LLC et al
as 3:2019cv07043
Defendant:
1955 Capital China Fund GP LLC and 1955 Capital Fund I GP LLC
Plaintiff:
China Fortune Land Development and Global Industrial Investment Ltd.
Interested Party:
ANDREW CHUNG
Cause Of Action: 09 U.S.C. § 0010
China Fortune Land Development et al v. 1955 Capital Fund I GP LLC et al
as 4:2019mc80259
Defendant:
1955 Capital China Fund GP LLC and 1955 Capital Fund I GP LLC
Plaintiff:
China Fortune Land Development and Global Industrial Development LTD.
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2014cv00734
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
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.
