Southern Appalachian Coal Sales, Inc. v. Citizens Bank of Northern Kentucky et al
Case Number: 2:2005cv00204
Filed: October 19, 2005
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky
Office: Covington Office
Presiding Judge: David L. Bunning
Presiding Judge: J. Gregory Wehrman
Nature of Suit: Racketeer/Corrupt Organization
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Racketeering (RICO) Act
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
September 30, 2008 Opinion or Order Filing 127 OPINION & ORDER: It Is Ordered that: 1) Plaintiffs' Objections to the Magistrate Judge's Order denying Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel production of SARs 87 are hereby overruled; 2) Defendant Cook & Sons Mining Co.'s Motion to Strike 117 and 122 are hereby denied; 3) Defendant Teresa Gillum's Motion for Summary Judgment 102 is hereby granted; 4) Defendant Citizens Bank of Northern Kentucky's Motion for Summary Judgment 103 is hereby gr anted; 5) Defendant Charles Welsh's Motion for Summary Judgment 104 is hereby granted; and 6) This action is hereby dismissed and stricken from the active docket of this Court. A separate Judgment shall be entered contemporaneously herewith. This is a final and appealable order. Signed by David L. Bunning on 9/30/2008.(JMM)cc: COR
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 Kentucky Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Southern Appalachian Coal Sales, Inc. v. Citizens Bank of Northern Kentucky et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | 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?