Legal Opinion
Aristocrat Leisure Ltd. v. Deutsche Bank Trust Co. Americas
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided September 16, 2009No. 04 Civ. 10014(PKL)PublishedCited by 44 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER
LEISURE, District Judge.
For the reasons set forth below, the Intervening Defendants’ motion to quash trial subpoenas is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.
BACKGROUND
The Court assumes familiarity with the facts and allegations as stated in the Court’s many prior decisions in this action. See Aristocrat Leisure Ltd. v. Deutsche Bank Trust Co. Ams., 618 F.Supp.2d 280 (S.D.N.Y. 2009) (Leisure, J.); Aristocrat Leisure Ltd. v. Deutsche Bank Trust Co. Ams., No. 04 Civ. 10014, 2007 WL 404767, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9521 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 5, 2007) (Leisure, J.); Aristocrat Leisure Ltd. v.…
2Cases cited34 opinions
- Gulf Oil Corp. v. GilbertSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
- United States v. Beech-Nut Nutrition Corp.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1989
- Starter Corporation, Plaintiff-Counter-Defendant-Appellant v. Converse, Inc., Defendant-Counter-Claimant-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1999
- In Re Fitch, Inc., Appellant-Cross-Appellee, American Savings Bank, Fsb, Plaintiff-Appellee-Cross-Appellant v. Ubs Painewebber, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2003
- DiRienzo v. Philip Services Corp.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2002
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by44 opinions
- Madu, Edozie & Madu, P.C. v. Socketworks Ltd. NigeriaDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2010
- Hamilton Partners, L.P. v. EnglardCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 2010
- Kinetic Concepts, Inc. v. Convatec Inc.District Court, M.D. North Carolina · 2010
- Green v. CosbyDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 2015
- Aristocrat Leisure Ltd. v. Deutsche Bank Trust Co. AmericasDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2010
39 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.