Goodrum v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. et al

Plaintiff: Dawn Goodrum
Defendant: Wal-Mart Stores East, L.P.
Case Number: 1:2014cv00016
Filed: January 30, 2014
Court: Kentucky Western District Court
Office: Bowling Green Office
County: Warren
Presiding Judge: Thomas B. Russell
Nature of Suit: Personal Injury- Product Liability
Cause of Action: 28:1441
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
April 13, 2015 28 Opinion or Order of the Court MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER granting 24 Motion to Dismiss. Signed by Judge Greg N. Stivers on 4/10/2015. cc: Plaintiff, pro se; Counsel (CDR)

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 Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Goodrum v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Dawn Goodrum
Represented By: Bobby H. Richardson(Designation Retained)
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Wal-Mart Stores East, L.P.
Represented By: Jennifer Kincaid Adams(Designation Retained)
Represented By: Anne E. Trout(Designation Retained)
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 [ 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.