Bennett v. Boyd Gaming Corporation
Jason Bennett |
Boyd Gaming Corporation |
1:2014cv00330 |
July 16, 2014 |
US District Court for the Southern District of Alabama |
Mobile Office |
Mobile |
William H. Steele |
Bert W. Milling |
Other Statutory Actions |
47 U.S.C. ยง 0151 Wire or Radio Communication |
Plaintiff |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 119 Order granting 111 MOTION for Attorney Fees. The requested attorney's fees, expenses and class representative payment are approved. Signed by Chief Judge William H. Steele on 11/23/2016. (tgw) |
Filing 118 JUDGMENT: In accordance with the Court's order of November 8, 2016 granting final certification of the Settlement Class and final approval of the parties' class settlement, and finding no just reason for delay in entry of this final judgment, it is hereby: ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED that this action is herebydismissed with prejudice. Signed by Chief Judge William H. Steele on 11/8/2016. (tgw) |
Filing 98 Order granting 92 MOTION for Appointment of Claims Administrator and Approval of Revised Claim Form. The parties are ordered by 7/22/2016 to file amended documents as set out. Signed by Chief Judge William H. Steele on 7/8/2016. (tgw) |
Filing 91 Order re: 79 MOTION to Approve Settlement Agreement. The motion is granted in part with the remainder held in abeyance. Plaintiff is ordered to file a motion for approval of claims form & approval of the claims administrator by 5/25/2016. Defen dant's response due by 6/1/2016. Plaintiff is ordered to file a supplemental brief in support of the instant motion by 6/8/2016. Defendant's response due by 6/22/2016. Earl Underwood,Ken Riemer & John Cox are appointed as class counsel to represent thesettlement class. Jason Bennett is appointed as class representative of thesettlement class. Signed by Chief Judge William H. Steele on 5/11/2016. (tgw) |
Filing 86 Order re: 79 MOTION to Approve Settlement Agreement APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION filed by Jason Bennett. Plaintiff is to file and serve by 1/7/16 a supplement to this motion as set out. Defendant is to file and serve by 1/21/16 its response to the plaintiff's supplemental filing. Plaintiff's miscellaneous deadline set for 1/7/2016; Defendant's miscellaneous deadline set for 1/21/2016. Signed by Chief Judge William H. Steele on 12/7/2015. (cmj) |
Filing 54 ORDER denying 46 Motion to Dismiss; granting the Motion to Strike the Second Amended Complaint; denying as moot the Motion to Strike the Class Allegations. The second amended complaint is stricken. Signed by Chief Judge William H. Steele on 5/6/2015. (tgw) |
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Alabama Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Search for this case: Bennett v. Boyd Gaming Corporation | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Plaintiff: Jason Bennett | |
Represented By: | Earl P. Underwood, Jr. |
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Defendant: Boyd Gaming Corporation | |
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.