Readiness Management Support, L. C. v. Jesco Construction Corporation, et al
Plaintiff: Readiness Management Support, L. C.
Defendant: Jesco Construction Corporation and County of Henderson
Case Number: 4:2009cv04003
Filed: February 6, 2009
Court: US District Court for the Central District of Illinois
Office: Rock Island Office
County: Henderson
Presiding Judge: John A. Gorman
Presiding Judge: Michael M. Mihm
Nature of Suit: Contract: Other
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
Jury Demanded By: Both

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
August 23, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 172 ORDER entered by Magistrate Judge John A. Gorman on 8/23/2011. The Rule 54(b) Motion 164 is GRANTED. The Clerk is directed to amend the judgment in this case to include judgment in favor of RMS and against Jesco in the principal amount of $4, 527,303.60 in principal plus Administrative Fees in the total amount of $3,292.886.71, with Administrative Fees accruing at $80,546.07 per month until the judgment is paid. The Motion to Dismiss Counts II, III and IV 166 is GRANTED. These Counts are dismissed without prejudice, parties to bear their own costs. (MZ, ilcd)
March 14, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 157 ORDER and OPINION by Magistrate Judge John A. Gorman: Because the facts are undisputed and because RMS is entitled to judgment as matter of law, the Motion for Summary Judgment [#66] is GRANTED. The Clerk is directed to Amend the Judgment in this cas e as follows: Judgment is entered in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendant JESCO in the amount of $4,527,303.60 plus administrative charges as calculated under the RMS Contract. The related motion for oral argument [#67] is DENIED AS MOOT. Entered on 3/14/11. (WW, ilcd)
January 14, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 139 ORDER and OPINION by Magistrate Judge John A. Gorman: The Joint Motion to Amend the Consent Judgment and to Dismiss Count V (#118) is GRANTED. The Joint Motion for Entry of Final Judgment (#121) is GRANTED. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment in favor of Readiness Management Support and against Henderson County as to Count VI and to dismiss Count V with prejudice. JESCOs Motion for Leave to File a Reply (#130) is GRANTED. JESCOs Motion for Hearing for Emergency Determination (#124) is DENIED. Entered on 1/14/11. (WW, ilcd)
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 Illinois Central District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Readiness Management Support, L. C. v. Jesco Construction Corporation, et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Readiness Management Support, L. C.
Represented By: James P Martin
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: Jesco Construction 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 ]
Defendant: County of Henderson
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.


Why Is My Information Online?