Ednacot v. Mesa Medical Group, PLLC

Justia Dockets & Filings Sixth Circuit Kentucky Eastern District Ednacot v. Mesa Medical Group, PLLC

Ednacot v. Mesa Medical Group, PLLC

Plaintiff:	Katisha Ednacot
Defendant:	Mesa Medical Group, PLLC
Case Number:	5:2014cv00096
Filed:	March 12, 2014
Court:	US District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky
Office:	Lexington Office
County:	Boyle
Presiding Judge:	Joseph M. Hood
Nature of Suit:	Other Labor Litigation
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 1441
Jury Demanded By:	Plaintiff

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed	Document Text
June 4, 2014	Filing 24 MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER: 1) Dft's 21 MOTION to Amend its Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED. 2) Clerk shall FILE Dft's tendered [21-1] Memo in Support of its Motion to Amend in the record. 3) Pla's 13 MOTION to Remand is DENIED. 4) Df t's 5 Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED IN PART in that Pla's claims of breach of contract, conversion, violation of KRS 337.385, fraud and fraud in the inducement, and negligence are dismissed in so far as they seek damages for an alleged exc essive withholding of FICA taxes and an illegal withholding of FUTA taxes, and DENIED IN PART, in that Pla's claims of breach of contract, conversion, violation of KRS 337.385, fraud and fraud in the inducement, and negligence are not dismissed in so far as they seek damages for an alleged excessive withholding of state unemployment taxes and for expenses wrongfully withheld from Pla's paychecks. 5) Pla's claims as listed are REMANDED to the Boyle Circuit Court. Signed by Judge Joseph M. Hood on 06/04/2014. (KLB) cc: COR

Date Filed

Document Text

June 4, 2014

Filing 24 MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER: 1) Dft's 21 MOTION to Amend its Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED. 2) Clerk shall FILE Dft's tendered [21-1] Memo in Support of its Motion to Amend in the record. 3) Pla's 13 MOTION to Remand is DENIED. 4) Df t's 5 Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED IN PART in that Pla's claims of breach of contract, conversion, violation of KRS 337.385, fraud and fraud in the inducement, and negligence are dismissed in so far as they seek damages for an alleged exc essive withholding of FICA taxes and an illegal withholding of FUTA taxes, and DENIED IN PART, in that Pla's claims of breach of contract, conversion, violation of KRS 337.385, fraud and fraud in the inducement, and negligence are not dismissed in so far as they seek damages for an alleged excessive withholding of state unemployment taxes and for expenses wrongfully withheld from Pla's paychecks. 5) Pla's claims as listed are REMANDED to the Boyle Circuit Court. Signed by Judge Joseph M. Hood on 06/04/2014. (KLB) 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: Ednacot v. Mesa Medical Group, PLLC
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Defendant: Mesa Medical Group, PLLC
Represented By:	Daniel E. Danford
Represented By:	Steven A. Neace
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 ]
Plaintiff: Katisha Ednacot
Represented By:	Justin Peterson
Represented By:	Mary Lauren Melton
Represented By:	J. Dale Golden
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?