Knoth v. Keith et al
Plaintiff: |
Stephanie S Knoth |
Defendant: |
Stephen P Keith, Southwest Mississippi Regional Medical Center, Gastroenterology Associates and Apollo Endosurgery US, Inc |
Case Number: |
5:2018cv00049 |
Filed: |
May 4, 2018 |
Court: |
US District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi |
Office: |
Western Office |
County: |
Pike |
Presiding Judge: |
Michael T. Parker |
Presiding Judge: |
David C. Bramlette |
Nature of Suit: |
Personal Injury: Health Care |
Cause of Action: |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
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 |
November 2, 2021 |
Filing
238
ORDER denying 224 Motion to Reopen Discovery. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael T. Parker on November 2, 2021. (js)
|
September 22, 2021 |
Filing
227
ORDER granting 226 Motion to Seal/Restrict Document 226 MOTION to RESTRICT from public : Document 224 MOTION to Reopen Discovery. ORDERED that Plaintiff may conventionally file the declaration of Joshua Sharlin, Ph.D. and the declarati on of Christian Torres, along with all attached documents to each declaration, under seal pursuant to the Confidentiality and Protective Order previously entered in this case. [ECF Doc. 57]. Signed by District Judge David C. Bramlette, III on September 22, 2021. (lda)
|
August 3, 2021 |
Filing
215
ORDER granting 151 Motion in Limine to Limit Use of Errata Sheet; denying 156 Motion in Limine to Preclude Testimony, Reports, or Reference to Withdrawn/Consulting Experts; deferring ruling on 161 Motion in Limine to Preclude Plaintiff from Introducing Irrelevant and Prejudicial Evidence that Relates to Preempted Claims; denying 163 Motion in Limine to Preclude Express Warranty theories that Lack Evidentiary support; denying 167 Motion in Limine to Preclude Evidence of Spoliation Until the Court Rules on Whether Plaintiff is Entitled to an Adverse Inference Instruction; deferring ruling on 170 Motion in Limine to Exclude Apollo-Knoth-00056. Movants may renew motions at trial, at which time the Court will have a clearer understanding of the issues. Signed by District Judge David C. Bramlette, III on 8/3/2021. (cp)
|
February 1, 2021 |
Filing
187
ORDER denying 165 Motion in Limine to Exclude Plaintiff's MDR. Signed by District Judge David C. Bramlette, III on 2/1/2021. (cp)
|
December 9, 2020 |
Filing
149
ORDER denying 126 Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed by District Judge David C. Bramlette, III on 12/9/2020. (cp)
|
September 30, 2020 |
Filing
146
ORDER granting in part and denying in part 124 Motion for Attorney Fees. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael T. Parker on September 30, 2020. (js)
|
September 16, 2020 |
Filing
141
ORDER granting 128 Motion to Dismiss; granting 130 Motion to Sever. The Court has adopted the proposed order agreed to by all parties. The Court will sever jurisdiction over Plaintiff's case against SMRMC, and the Court will retain jurisd iction over Plaintiff's case against Apollo. Defendant SMRMC is dismissed without prejudice from this action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Signed by District Judge David C. Bramlette, III on 9/16/2020. (cp) Modified on 9/16/2020 (VM).
|
November 8, 2019 |
Filing
67
ORDER granting in part and denying in part 46 Motion to Dismiss Signed by District Judge David C. Bramlette, III on 11/08/2019 (sl)
|
December 27, 2018 |
Filing
29
ORDER finding as moot 9 Motion to Dismiss; finding as moot 18 Motion to Dismiss; granting 23 Motion to Amend/Correct Signed by Honorable David C. Bramlette, III on 12/27/2018 (DW)
|
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 Mississippi Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
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?