MCCARTHY et al v. FULLER et al
| KEVIN B. MCCARTHY, ALBERT H. LANGSENKAMP and BVM FOUNDATION, INC. |
| PATRICIA ANN FULLER and JOHN DOE |
| 1:2008cv00994 |
| July 25, 2008 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana |
| Indianapolis Office |
| Marion |
| William T. Lawrence |
| Jane Magnus-Stinson |
| None |
| 18 U.S.C. ยง 1962 Racketeering (RICO) Act |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
892
ENTRY ON VARIOUS MOTIONS: For clarity's sake, the Court has resolved the motions addressed in this Entry as follows: The Plaintiffs' Motion to Hold Defendant Paul Hartman in Contempt (Dkt. No. 858)is DENIED. The Plaintiffs ' Motion to Permit Registration of the Amended Judgment (Dkt. No.867) is DENIED. The Plaintiffs' Motion to Strike (Dkt. No. 879) is DENIED. The Defendants' Motion to Disqualify District Court and Magistrate and Reassign Cas e (Dkt. No. 889) is DENIED. The Defendants' Motion to Vacate (Dkt. No. 891) is DENIED. The Defendants shall order the complete trial transcript on or before Wednesday, February 11,2015. Thus, the only pending motion left in this cause is the Plaintiffs' Motion for Attorney Fees (Dkt. No. 831). The Court will resolve that motion in due course ***SEE ENTRY FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION***. Signed by Judge William T. Lawrence on 1/27/2015. Copy sent via US Mai. (DW)
|
|
Filing
854
ENTRY ON POST-TRIAL MOTIONS: The Court believes that this Entry resolves all of the parties' post-trial motions with the exception of the Plaintiffs' motion for attorneys' fees, which is taken under advisement pending the Defendants&# 039; response as set forth above. In addition, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(d), the Clerk is directed to tax costs in favor of the Plaintiffs as set forth in their Bill of Costs (Dkt. No. 830) ***SEE ENTRY FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION***. Signed by Judge William T. Lawrence on 9/18/2014. Copy sent via US Mai. (DW)
|
|
Filing
828
ENTRY Regarding Rule 50 Motions and Other Matters - During the course of the trial of this matter, the Court granted in part the Counterclaim Defendants' motions for judgment as a matter of law pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 50(a ) and took the remainder of the parties' Rule 50 motions under advisement. Those motions are addressed. In addition, the Court sets forth below more detailed reasons for several other rulings that were made during the course of the trial. Finally, the Court explains its application of Indiana law to the punitive damages awarded by the jury. ***SEE ENTRY***. Signed by Judge William T. Lawrence on 3/19/2014. (copy to Larry Young via US Mail) (JKS)
|
|
Filing
682
ENTRY ON MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT: The Counterclaim Defendants' 628 motion for partial summary judgment is GRANTED to the following extent: the Court finds, as a matter of law, that the Counterclaim Defendants' sale of the Medallions that they obtained from Fuller did not constitute trademark infringement. This ruling does not apply to the sale of any other Medallions or religious jewelry, if such sales occurred. It also does not address in any way any other legal theory related to the sale of Fuller's Medallio ns. Finally, it does not address the issue of whether any other activities by the Counterclaim Defendants constitute trademark infringement (see Entry for additional information). Copy via US Mail to Larry Young. Signed by Judge William T. Lawrence on 11/15/2013. (SWM)
|
|
Filing
681
ENTRY denying Defendant's 669 Motion for Protective Order (see Entry). Copy provided via US Mail to Larry Young. Signed by Judge William T. Lawrence on 11/13/2013. (SWM)
|
|
Filing
627
ENTRY On Remaining Pending Motions - Sigma Micro Corporation's Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. No. 398 ) is GRANTED and Sigma Micro Corporation is no longer a party to this case; the Plaintiffs' Motion to Dismiss Count 18 of Amended Countercla im (Dkt. No. 408 ) is GRANTED; the request for sanctions contained in the Plaintiffs' Notice of Defendant's Noncompliance with the Court's "Entry Following Status Conference" and Request for Sanctions (Dkt. No. 525 ) is DENIED; the Plaintiffs' Motion for Relief as a Result of Ongoing Fraud (Dkt. No. 556 ) is DENIED; and the Plaintiffs' Petition for Costs Incurred to Complete the Deposition of Fuller (Dkt. No. 610 ) is GRANTED and Fuller is ordered to r eimburse the Plaintiffs the amount of $4107.61 within 45 days of the date of this Entry. Finally, on the Court's own motion pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(f), summary judgment is entered in favor of the Counterclaim Defendants on Count 20 of the Amended Counterclaim. ***SEE ENTRY***. Signed by Judge William T. Lawrence on 6/5/2013. (copy to Larry Young via US Mail)(JKS)
|
|
Filing
485
ENTRY IN ADVANCE OF STATUS CONFERENCE: Accordingly, the Court hereby adopts Magistrate Judge Lynch's recommendation and sanctions Ms. Cramer in the amount of $500.00. Ms. Cramer shall pay the sanction by check made payable to the Cle rk of this court by September 14, 2012; the check shall reference the cause number of this case. Accordingly, the motion to strike 447 is GRANTED and the Clerk is directed to STRIKE the exhibit to Docket No. 443 from the docket. The Court, be ing duly advised, DENIES the motion 457 for the reasons set forth below. Accordingly, the Court finds that the Defendants have failed to prosecute their claims against Kershaw and those claims therefore are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE5 pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) ***SEE ENTRY FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION***. Signed by Judge William T. Lawrence on 8/13/2012. Copy sent to Larry Young via US Mail. (DW)
|
|
Filing
429
ENTRY ON THE PLAINTIFFS' RENEWED AND SUPPLEMENTAL REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE: The Court, being duly advised, GRANTS the motion to strike 392 and DENIES the Renewed Request 317 . Clerk is directed to indicate on the Court's docket that the response (dkt. no. 388) has been stricken ***SEE ENTRY FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION***. Signed by Judge William T. Lawrence on 5/23/2012. Copy sent to Larry Young via US Mail. (DW)
|
|
Filing
393
ENTRY REGARDING THE DEPOSITION OF ALAN KERSHAW: Because the deposition of Kershaw was not conducted in compliance with the requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 28, it was not a "lawful deposition" such that it satisfies the requ irements of Federal Rule of Evidence 804(b)(1). Inasmuch as the Plaintiffs have not offered any other rule under which Kershaw's deposition testimony would be admissible at trial, the Defendants' objection to its admission is SUSTAINED ***SEE ENTRY FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION***. Signed by Judge William T. Lawrence on 5/10/2012. Copy sent to Larry Young via US Mail. (DW)
|
|
Filing
382
ENTRY ON MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS: For the reasons set forth above, the Counterclaim Defendants' motion for judgment on the pleadings on all of the Counterclaimants' claims pursuant to RICO and the Indiana Act 194 is GRANTED ***SEE ENTRY FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION***. Signed by Judge William T. Lawrence on 5/2/2012. Copy sent to Larry Young via US Mail. (DW)
|
|
Filing
355
ENTRY ON COUNTERCLAIM DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT: For the reasons set forth above, the Counterclaim Defendants' motion for partial summary judgment 226 is GRANTED with regard to the following issues: 1. Hartman' ;s defamation claims; 2. Fuller's defamation claims with regard to Statements 8, 15-73, 79, 84, and 86-115; 3. Fuller's trade dress infringement claims; and 4. Fuller's copyright infringement claims with regard to the Latrobe statue, t he Website, the Correspondence, and the Medallions. The motion is DENIED in all other respects, except to the extent that certain issues raised in the motion will be addressed by the Court in other contexts as explained herein ***SEE ENTRY FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION***. Signed by Judge William T. Lawrence on 4/24/2012. (DW)
|
|
Filing
326
ENTRY ON MOTION TO STAY AND MOTION TO CONTINUE: Accordingly, the motion to stay 204 is DENIED. The motion to continue 322 is, accordingly, DENIED ***SEE ENTRY FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION***. Signed by Judge William T. Lawrence on 4/11/2012. (DW)
|
|
Filing
311
ORDER. The Thomas More Law Center's Motion for Leave to File Amicus Curiae Brief (Dkt. 216) is DENIED, and the accompanying motion for admission pro hac vice (Dkt. 215) is DENIED AS MOOT. Bishop Thomas John Paprocki's Petition for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice and Motion for Leave to File as Amicus Curiae (Dkt. 218) is DENIED. The Clerk of the Court is directed to return to Ms. Merino her pro hac vice filing fee. (It appears that Bishop Paprocki did not pay the fee, but if he did, it is to be returned as well.) In addition, the appearance of Diamond Hirschauer (Dkt. 214), though denominated an appearance as co-counsel for a party, is in substance an appearance for the Law Center. Her appearance is therefore STRICKEN. If the court has misapprehended the nature of Ms. Hirschauer's appearance, she may file an appearance clarifying her role. Signed by Magistrate Judge Debra McVicker Lynch on 3/29/2012. (LH)
|
|
Filing
268
ENTRY ON PLAINTIFFS' REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE: Plaintiffs' Request to Take Judicial Notice 151 must be, and is, DENIED. The motion to strike 161 is therefore DENIED AS MOOT ***SEE ENTRY FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION***. Signed by Judge William T. Lawrence on 3/12/2012. (DW)
|
|
Filing
190
Order on Pending Motions - All requests for relief included in McCarthy's Notice (Dkt. 187) and Fuller's motion (Dkt. 188) not specifically addressed in this order are DENIED. (See Order for details.) Signed by Magistrate Judge Debra McVicker Lynch on 11/9/2011. c/m (TMA)
|
|
Filing
179
ORDER granting in part and denying in part 164 Motion to Compel. Ms. Fuller's supplemental responses, as directed by the court in this entry, shall be served on the plaintiffs by October 5, 2011. Signed by Magistrate Judge Debra McVicker Lynch on 9/22/2011. (LH)
|
|
Filing
119
ENTRY ON MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT: For the reasons explained above, the Plaintiffs' motion for partial summary judgment 73 is DENIED. The Defendant's second response to that motion 95 and surreply 113 are ORDERED STRICKEN from the record. The Plaintiffs' motion for leave to file a response to the surreply 116 is DENIED AS MOOT **SEE ENTRY**. Signed by Judge William T. Lawrence on 6/3/2010. (DWH)
|
|
Filing
118
ENTRY REGARDING MOTION TO STRIKE AND MOTION TO DISMISS: For the reasons set forth above, the Plaintiffs' motion to strike 66 the amended counterclaimis DENIED. In light of this ruling, the Plaintiffs' motion to dismiss the original counterclaim 55 is DENIED AS MOOT **SEE ENTRY**. Signed by Judge William T. Lawrence on 6/1/2010. (DWH)
|
|
Filing
47
ENTRY REGARDING MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT: For the reasons set forth above, the Plaintiffs' motion for default judgment 42 is DENIED. The Defendants Answer is DEEMED FILED as of the date of this Entry. To avoid confusion, the Clerk is directed to STRIKE Docket No. 45 and refile the Answer on the docket so that the docket entry reflects today's date **SEE ENTRY**. Signed by Judge William T. Lawrence on 10/29/2009. (DWH)
|
|
Filing
41
ORDER: For the foregoing reasons, Defendants' motions 33 and 34 are DENIED **SEE ORDER**. Signed by Judge William T. Lawrence on 9/11/2009.(DWH)
|
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 Indiana 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
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.
