Skip to content.
About GPO   |   Newsroom/Media   |   Congressional Relations   |   Inspector General   |   Careers   |   Contact   |   askGPO   |   Help  
 

  FDsys > More Information
(Search string is required)
 

15-3230 - Castillo et al v. G&M Realty L.P. et al


Download Files

Metadata

Document in Context
15-3230 - Castillo et al v. G&M Realty L.P. et al
March 31, 2017
PDF | More
MEMORANDUM and ORDER: For the reasons stated in the Court's Memorandum and Order, the defendants motion for summary judgment29 is GRANTED as to the plaintiffs claims for conversion, property damage, and IIED, but DENIED as to the plaintiffs VARA claim, and the plaintiffs motion for summary judgment is GRANTED with respect to the defendants counterclaim. Accordingly, the matter shall proceed to trial on the VARA claim issue. In addition, as the plaintiffs counsel was unable to specify the number of artwork at issue, counsel is directed to submit a final list to the defendants and the Court on or before May 1, 2017. Depending on the length of the list, the Court reserves judgment as to whether the list is short enough to be handled by a single jury. Ordered by Judge Frederic Block on 3/31/2017. (Innelli, Michael) (Main Document 32 replaced on 4/10/2017) (Innelli, Michael). Modified on 4/10/2017 TO CORRECT A TYPO. (Innelli, Michael).
February 12, 2018
PDF | More
DECISION: This is the Court's written decision in what has commonly become know as the 5Pointz litigation. The Court finds in favor of the plaintiffs in the amounts determined in this decision. Judgement will be entered shortly. Ordered by Judge Frederic Block on 2/12/2018. (Innelli, Michael)
March 6, 2018
PDF | More
MEMORANDUM and ORDER: Defendants motion 74 seeking a stay is granted in part and denied in part. In the exercise of its discretion, the Court grants defendants a seven-day extension of the current stay until March 14, 2018. This will afford defendants a total of 21 days from judgment to secure a supersedeas bond or, alternatively, an appropriate letter of credit. Regardless of which, if any, is presented to the Court, it will rule on its adequacy when submitted. Defendants alternative motion to stay pending post- trial motions is denied as premature, as no such motions have been filed. Ordered by Judge Frederic Block on 3/6/2018. (Innelli, Michael)
March 15, 2018
PDF | More
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: While defendants proposed bond covers only the amount of judgment, the Court is satisfied that defendants, well-financed real estate companies and their wealthy owner, will be fiscally able to pay interest and costs after the appellate process ends. Therefore, the proposed bond is approved, and enforcement of judgment is stayed pending appeal. Ordered by Judge Frederic Block on 3/15/2018. (Innelli, Michael)