Examples of Goldman Parties in a sentence
Rather, the question posed by the Picower Parties’ Count II is whether the Goldman Parties should be permanently barred from filing any more complaints against them in the Florida District Court or anywhere else.
Future Proceedings Count II of the Picower Parties’ complaint, as modified by the Order Denying Dismissal, seeks “to deny the Goldman Parties leave to re-plead any complaint against the Picower Parties” should the Court determine that the Goldman Parties’ Complaint is enjoined by the Permanent Injunction.
For example, if the Goldman Parties had attributed a statement of fact to a specific witness at the criminal trial, I would not have to blindly accept their characterization of that testimony and could review the transcript to determine whether the witness actually said what the Goldman Parties’ claim he or she said.
The Trustee and the Picower Parties have not asserted any claims; they are seeking to enforce the Permanent Injunction and the automatic stay, and the question is whether the Complaint violates that Permanent Injunction and the automatic stay under the rules laid out in the prior decisions regarding the Goldman Parties and Fox/Marshall complaints.
The Goldman Parties objected contending that I am limited to the allegations in the Complaint as I would be on a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Fox II The Goldman Parties did not ultimately pursue an appeal of this Court’s Goldman II decision,5 but Fox/Marshall did.
The Goldman Parties argue that the Complaint should nevertheless be spared the same fate as their prior pleadings based on the “Propping Up” and “Counterparty” Allegations.
In the end, the Goldman Parties allege that the Picower Parties made two loans, one in 1992 or 1993 in the sum of $76 million, (see Complaint at ¶¶ 68, 70), which was possibly more than two years before he became an alleged control person, (id.
Ct. 2895 (2014), which the Goldman Parties cite in support of their contention that their section 20(a) claim is direct, is distinguishable.
For the reasons that follow, the applications for injunctive relief are granted, but the Picower Parties’ request to enjoin the Goldman Parties from filing further pleadings is denied.