Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Fort Worth Employees' Retirement Fund v. J.P. Morgan Chase & Co.

United States District Court, Southern District of New York

April 14, 2015

FORT WORTH EMPLOYEES’ RETIREMENT FUND, et al., Plaintiffs,
v.
J.P. MORGAN CHASE & CO., et al., Defendants.

Arthur C. Leahy, Esq., Ivy T, Ngo, Esq., Jonah H. Goldstein, Esq., Matthew I. Alpert, Esq., Nathan R. Lindell, Esq., Scott H. Saham, Esq., Susan G. Taylor, Esq., Thomas E. Egler, Esq., L. Dana Martindale, Esq., Daniel S. Drosman, Esq., Darryl J. Alvarado, Esq., Caroline M. Robert, Esq., Hilary B. Stakem, Esq., Angel P.Lau, Esq., Ashley M. Robinson, Esq., Lucas F. Olts, Esq., Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP

David A. Rosenfeld, Esq., Samuel H. Rudman, Esq., Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP

Luke O. Brooks, Esq., Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP

Joseph P. Guglielmo, Esq., Thomas L. Laughlin, IV, Esq., Scott Scott, L.L.P.

Geoffrey M. Johnson, Esq. Scott Scott, L.L.P.

Alfred R. Pietrzak, Esq. Dorothy J. Spenner, Esq. Owen H. Smith, Esq. David L. Breau, Esq. Daniel A. McLaughlin, Esq. Danny C. Moxley, Esq. Andrew W. Sters, Esq. Tom A. Paskowitz, Esq. Sidley Austin LLP

Alison L. MacGregor, Esq. Kelley Drye & Warren, LLP

Darrell S. Cafasso, Esq., William B. Monahan, Esq, Tina G. Barton, Esq. Sullivan & Cromwell, LLP

Robert A. Sacks. Esq., Sullivan & Cromwell, LLP

Richard F. Lubarsky, Esq. Levi Lubarsky & Feigenbaum LLP

Rebecca L. Butcher, Esq. Landis Rath & Cobb LLP

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

JAMES C. FRANCIS IV UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

This is a securities action brought on behalf of a class of purchasers of residential mortgage-backed securities issued by J.P. Morgan Acceptance Corporation I. The plaintiffs have submitted a letter motion seeking a ruling that: (1) documents clawed back at a witness’ deposition are not subject to the attorney-cleint privilege; (2) documents withheld or clawed back by the defendants as related to Suspicious Activity Reports (“SARs”) must be disclosed; and (3) the defendants have waived any privilege by failing to produce an adequate privilege ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.