Richards v. Canyon County
||James E. Richards
||August 16, 2012
||Idaho District Court
||Boise - Southern Office
||Ada - Southern
||Edward J. Lodge
|Nature of Suit:
||Other Labor Litigation
|Cause of Action:
|Jury Demanded By:
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|Date Filed||#||Document Text|
|January 7, 2014
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER re: 14 MOTION to Certify Class. The Court will allow the parties until Friday, 2/21/2014 to complete discovery on the issues identified as needing further development, specifically whether Richards has standing and whe ther the predominance inquiry is satisfied. Each party then may file on a memorandum addressing the standing and predominance issues no later than Friday, 3/7/2014. Each party may file a response no later than Friday, 3/14/2014. After receiving and r eviewing the additional filings, the Court will issue a further written decision with a final decision upon Plaintiffs Motion for Class Certification. (Case Management deadline set for 3/7/2014.). Signed by Judge Ronald E. Bush. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by (cjm)
|March 26, 2014
SECOND MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER ON PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO CERTIFY CLASS. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiffs Motion to Certify Class 14 is DENIED. Plaintiffs Complaint is hereby DISMISSED for lack of standing. Signed by Judge Ronald E. Bush. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by (st)
Access additional case information on PACER
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 Idaho District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
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.