§Why CasetextPricing

Puricelli v. The Republic of Argentina

MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Support re: 132 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction . Memorandum of Law in Support of Class Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Injunction. Document

6 Cited authorities

  1. Henrietta D. v. Bloomberg

    Nos. 02-7022 (L), 02-7074 (CON) (2d Cir. Jun. 9, 2003)   Cited 820 times
    Holding that states incurred liability under the Rehabilitation Act for localities’ violations because the states’ acceptance of federal funds had reflected a promise to ensure statutory compliance

  2. Ali v. Mukasey

    529 F.3d 478 (2d Cir. 2008)   Cited 231 times
    Holding that the law of the case should not be overturned "absent 'cogent' and 'compelling' reasons such as 'an intervening change of controlling law, the availability of new evidence, or the need to correct a clear error or prevent manifest injustice'" (quoting United States v. Tenzer, 213 F.3d 34, 39 (2d Cir. 2000))

  3. NML CAPITAL, LTD v. BCRA

    652 F.3d 172 (2d Cir. 2011)   Cited 64 times
    Vacating attachment of same reserves

  4. NML Capital, Ltd. v. Republic of Argentina

    727 F.3d 230 (2d Cir. 2013)   Cited 40 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a non-party may appeal an injunction by which it is bound

  5. NML Capital, Ltd. v. Republic of Argentina

    699 F.3d 246 (2d Cir. 2012)   Cited 36 times
    Finding that in light of debtor's “disregard of its legal obligations” to creditors, public interest favored permanent injunction requiring specific performance of those obligations

  6. Rule 23 - Class Actions

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 23   Cited 36,582 times   1266 Legal Analyses
    Holding that, to certify a class, the court must find that "questions of law or fact common to class members predominate over any questions affecting only individual members"