Davis v. Toyota Motor Sales

Davis v. Toyota Motor Sales

Plaintiff:	Marcus Davis
Defendant:	Toyota Motor Sales
Case Number:	3:2014cv00683
Filed:	October 29, 2014
Court:	US District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana
Office:	Baton Rouge Office
Presiding Judge:	John W. deGravelles
Presiding Judge:	Richard L. Bourgeois
Nature of Suit:	Motor Vehicle
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
Jury Demanded By:	None

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
September 30, 2015	Filing 29 RULING AND ORDER granting 24 Motion to Dismiss. Plaintiff's claims are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE because Plaintiff's claims are prescribed on the face of his complaint and Plaintiff has failed to establish in his amended complaint an exception to prescription. Signed by Judge John W. deGravelles on 09/30/2015. (BCL)
May 29, 2015	Filing 20 RULING AND ORDER granting 11 Motion to Dismiss without prejudice. Plaintiff is given twenty-eight (28) days within which to amend his complaint to cure the deficiencies in his complaint and to allege: a) When Defendant admitted to the government t hat its vehicle was defected; b) If and when the Defendant acknowledged liability to the Plaintiff for his injuries; c) What injuries were suffered in the accident and whether they were caused by the allegedly defective airbag; and d) When Plaintiff became aware of the alleged defect in the airbag and when, how, and for how long any injury suffered in the accident justifiably delayed his filing suit. In the event that Plaintiff fails to file an amendment to his complaint within that time, his claims will be dismissed with prejudice. Signed by Judge John W. deGravelles on 05/29/2015. (BCL)

Date Filed

Document Text

September 30, 2015

Filing 29 RULING AND ORDER granting 24 Motion to Dismiss. Plaintiff's claims are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE because Plaintiff's claims are prescribed on the face of his complaint and Plaintiff has failed to establish in his amended complaint an exception to prescription. Signed by Judge John W. deGravelles on 09/30/2015. (BCL)

May 29, 2015

Filing 20 RULING AND ORDER granting 11 Motion to Dismiss without prejudice. Plaintiff is given twenty-eight (28) days within which to amend his complaint to cure the deficiencies in his complaint and to allege: a) When Defendant admitted to the government t hat its vehicle was defected; b) If and when the Defendant acknowledged liability to the Plaintiff for his injuries; c) What injuries were suffered in the accident and whether they were caused by the allegedly defective airbag; and d) When Plaintiff became aware of the alleged defect in the airbag and when, how, and for how long any injury suffered in the accident justifiably delayed his filing suit. In the event that Plaintiff fails to file an amendment to his complaint within that time, his claims will be dismissed with prejudice. Signed by Judge John W. deGravelles on 05/29/2015. (BCL)

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 Louisiana Middle District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Davis v. Toyota Motor Sales
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: Marcus Davis
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: Toyota Motor Sales
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?