043.pdf
99.4 KB
Extraction Summary
10
People
3
Organizations
2
Locations
2
Events
2
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Court judgment
File Size:
99.4 KB
Summary
This document is a formal Judgment from the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York dated January 12, 2024. It dismisses with prejudice the lawsuit (Case 1:23-cv-03903-JSR) filed by pension funds against James Dimon, James Staley, and other JPMorgan board members/executives. The court ruled that despite amended complaints and additional allegations, the case must be closed.
People (10)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| James Dimon | Defendant |
Listed as a defendant in the lawsuit (JPMorgan Chase CEO)
|
| Stephen B. Burke | Defendant |
Listed as a defendant
|
| Todd A. Combs | Defendant |
Listed as a defendant
|
| James S. Crown | Defendant |
Listed as a defendant
|
| Timothy P. Flynn | Defendant |
Listed as a defendant
|
| Mellody Hobson | Defendant |
Listed as a defendant
|
| John W. Kessler | Defendant |
Listed as a defendant
|
| Phebe N. Novakovic | Defendant |
Listed as a defendant
|
| James E. Staley | Defendant |
Listed as a defendant (Former JPMorgan executive)
|
| Ruby J. Krajick | Clerk of Court |
Signatory for the Southern District of New York
|
Organizations (3)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| United States District Court Southern District of New York |
Venue of the lawsuit
|
|
| City of Miami General Employees & Sanitation Employees Retirement Trust |
Institutional investor suing the defendants
|
|
| Operating Engineers Construction Industry and Miscellaneous Pension Fund |
Institutional investor suing the defendants
|
Timeline (2 events)
2024-01-12
Judgment issued dismissing the case with prejudice.
New York, New York
Locations (2)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Location of the court and issuance of judgment
|
|
|
Jurisdiction
|
Relationships (2)
City of Miami General Employees & Sanitation Employees Retirement Trust
→
Legal Adversary
→
James Dimon
Plaintiff vs Defendant in Case 1:23-cv-03903-JSR
Listed together as defendants in the judgment caption
Key Quotes (3)
"It is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED: That for the reasons stated in the Court's Opinion and Order dated January 12, 2024, the Court grants the motions to dismiss."Source
043.pdf
Quote #1
"Because the plaintiffs have already amended their complaint and because, even based on the additional allegations referenced in their reply papers, the complaint would still have to be dismissed, the dismissal is with prejudice."Source
043.pdf
Quote #2
"Accordingly, the Court hereby dismisses the case with prejudice and closes the case."Source
043.pdf
Quote #3
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,233 characters)
Case 1:23-cv-03903-JSR Document 43 Filed 01/12/24 Page 1 of 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
--------------------------------------------------------------------X
CITY OF MIAMI GENERAL EMPLOYEES &
SANITATION EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT
TRUST and OPERATING ENGINEERS
CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY AND
MISCELLANEOUS PENSION FUND
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
--------------------------------------------------------------------X
CITY OF MIAMI GENERAL EMPLOYEES &
SANITATION EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT
TRUST and OPERATING ENGINEERS
CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY AND
MISCELLANEOUS PENSION FUND
Plaintiff,
23 CIVIL 3903(JSR)
23 CIVIL 3903(JSR)
-against-
JUDGMENT
JUDGMENT
JAMES DIMON, STEPHEN B. BURKE,
TODD A. COMBS, JAMES S. CROWN,
TIMOTHY P. FLYNN, MELLODY HOBSON,
JOHN W. KESSLER, PHEBE N.
NOVAKOVIC, and JAMES E. STALEY,
TODD A. COMBS, JAMES S. CROWN,
TIMOTHY P. FLYNN, MELLODY HOBSON,
JOHN W. KESSLER, PHEBE N.
NOVAKOVIC, and JAMES E. STALEY,
Defendants.
-------------------------------------------------------------------X
-------------------------------------------------------------------X
It is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED: That for the reasons
stated in the Court's Opinion and Order dated January 12, 2024, the Court grants the motions to
dismiss. Because the plaintiffs have already amended their complaint and because, even based on
the additional allegations referenced in their reply papers, the complaint would still have to be
dismissed, the dismissal is with prejudice. Accordingly, the Court hereby dismisses the case with
prejudice and closes the case.
stated in the Court's Opinion and Order dated January 12, 2024, the Court grants the motions to
dismiss. Because the plaintiffs have already amended their complaint and because, even based on
the additional allegations referenced in their reply papers, the complaint would still have to be
dismissed, the dismissal is with prejudice. Accordingly, the Court hereby dismisses the case with
prejudice and closes the case.
Dated: New York, New York
January 12, 2024
January 12, 2024
RUBY J. KRAJICK
Clerk of Court
Clerk of Court
BY:
_________________________
Deputy Clerk
_________________________
Deputy Clerk
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document