Legal Opinion

Brady v. Basic Research, L.L.C.

District Court, E.D. New York

Decided February 3, 2016No. Case No. 2:13-cv-7169 (SFJ)(ARL)PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER on Defendants’ Rule 67 Motion

FEUERSTEIN, United States District Judge

I. Introduction

On January 21, 2016, by letter motion and pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 67, the Defendants moved for permission to deposit funds with the Clerk of Court “consistent with the Rule 68 offer of judgment that [they] previously made to Plaintiffs.” (“Rule 67 Motion”; ECF No. 79.) The Plaintiffs objected. (“Objection”; see ECF No. 80.) For the reasons that follow, the Rule 67 Motion is DENIED.

II. The Relief Sought

The Court assumes the parties’ familiarity with the facts and procedural background…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Campbell-Ewald Co. v. GomezSupreme Court of the United States · 2016
  2. John v. Sotheby's, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1992
  3. Ray Legal Consulting Group v. DijosephDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2014

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Richard Chen v. Allstate Insurance Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2016
  2. Tegtmeier v. PJ Iowa, L.C.District Court, S.D. Iowa · 2016
  3. Jarzyna v. Home Properties, L.P.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2016
  4. Fauley v. Royal Canin U.S.A., Inc.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 2016
  5. BMO Harris Bank N.A. v. SmithDistrict Court, D. Kansas · 2020

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API