1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. RICHARDSON v. OPPENHEIMER HOLDINGS, INC.
 

RICHARDSON v. OPPENHEIMER HOLDINGS, INC.

Case No. 2:11-cv-02078-GMN-PAL.

WILLIAM A. RICHARDSON, Plaintiff, v. OPPENHEIMER HOLDINGS, INC., et al., Defendants.

United States District Court, D. Nevada.

May 24, 2012.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

William A. Richardson, Plaintiff, represented by David Z. Chesnoff , CHESNOFF & SCHONFELD & Richard A Schonfeld , Chesnoff & Schonfeld.

Oppenheimer Holdings, Inc., Defendant, represented by Charles R. Acker , Fulbright & Jaworski L.L.P., Pro Hac Vice, Karie N. Wilson , Alverson Taylor Mortensen & Sanders & Peter Stokes , Fulbright & Jaworski L.L.P..

Oppenheimer Asset Management, Inc., Defendant, represented by Charles R. Acker , Fulbright & Jaworski L.L.P., Pro Hac Vice, Karie N. Wilson , Alverson Taylor Mortensen & Sanders & Peter Stokes , Fulbright & Jaworski L.L.P..

Albert Lowenthal, Defendant, represented by Charles R. Acker , Fulbright & Jaworski L.L.P., Pro Hac Vice, Karie N. Wilson , Alverson Taylor Mortensen & Sanders & Peter Stokes , Fulbright & Jaworski L.L.P..

Robert Lowenthal, Defendant, represented by Charles R. Acker , Fulbright & Jaworski L.L.P., Pro Hac Vice, Karie N. Wilson , Alverson Taylor Mortensen & Sanders & Peter Stokes , Fulbright & Jaworski L.L.P..

Greg White, Defendant, represented by Charles R. Acker , Fulbright & Jaworski L.L.P., Pro Hac Vice, Karie N. Wilson , Alverson Taylor Mortensen & Sanders & Peter Stokes , Fulbright & Jaworski L.L.P..

Mark Weinberg, Defendant, represented by Charles R. Acker , Fulbright & Jaworski L.L.P., Pro Hac Vice, Karie N. Wilson , Alverson Taylor Mortensen & Sanders & Peter Stokes , Fulbright & Jaworski L.L.P..

Oppenheimer & Co., Inc., Defendant, represented by Charles R. Acker , Fulbright & Jaworski L.L.P., Pro Hac Vice, Karie N. Wilson , Alverson Taylor Mortensen & Sanders & Peter Stokes , Fulbright & Jaworski L.L.P..

ORDER

PEGGY A. LEEN, Magistrate Judge.

Before the court is the parties' Stipulation and Proposed Order to Extend Discovery and Other Deadlines (Dkt. #30). The Complaint (Dkt. #1) in this case was filed December 22, 2011. Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. #18) March 26, 2012. On May 17, 2012, the court entered a Discovery Plan and Scheduling Order (Dkt. #29) when the parties had not submitted one as required by LR 26-1. In...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases