Harbison v. Rich Gullet and Sons, Inc.

Plaintiff: Fred Harbison, Jr.
Defendant: Rich Gullet and Sons, Inc.
Case Number: 4:2013cv01138
Filed: June 14, 2013
Court: Missouri Eastern District Court
Office: St. Louis Office
County: St. Louis - County
Presiding Judge: Shirley P. Mensah
Nature of Suit: P.I.: Other
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
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
October 29, 2014 102 Opinion or Order of the Court MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion to dismiss Plaintiff's claim against Defendant McDonough-Whitlow, P.C., dismiss and/or sever Defendant Rich Gullet and Sons, Inc.'s cross-claim against McDonoug h-Whitlow, P.C., and dismiss and/or sever McDonough-Whitlow, P.C.s third-party claims against McCann Concrete Products, Inc., McGrath and Associates, and Ameren UE (Doc. 93 ) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. The motion to dismiss Plaintiff& #039;s claim against Defendant McDonough-Whitlow, P.C. is GRANTED; the motion to dismiss and/or sever Defendant Rich Gullet and Sons, Inc.'s cross claim against McDonough is DENIED; and the motion to dismiss and/or sever McDonoughs third part y claims against McCann Concrete Products, Inc., McGrath and Associates, and Ameren UE is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's claim against Defendant McDonough-Whitlow, P.C., is DISMISSED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Rich Gullet and Sons, Inc.'s request that its crossclaim against McDonough-Whitlow be treated as a third-party claim (Doc. 87 ) is GRANTED. Signed by Magistrate Judge Shirley P. Mensah on 10/29/14. (JWD)
March 4, 2015 152 Opinion or Order of the Court MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's motions to dismiss, strike, and/or hold separate trials on the claims against McCann (Docs. 122-1, 122-2, and 126-1), are DENIED.. Signed by Magistrate Judge Shirley P. Mensah on 3/4/15. (LGK)
April 9, 2015 153 Opinion or Order of the Court MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the word "indemnity" is stricken from Paragraph 19 of McGraths Counterclaim for Contribution against McDonough (Doc. 119 ). IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the word "indemnity" is st ricken from Paragraph 7 of Rich Gullet's Amended Cross-Claim against McDonough (Doc. 115 ). IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that McDonough's motion to dismiss or for a more definite statement regarding McGrath's Counterclaim (Doc. 124 ) is DE NIED AS MOOT. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that McDonough's motion to dismiss or for a more definite statement regarding Rich Gullet's Amended Cross-Claims (Doc. 125 ) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. With regard to Count I ("Contribution"), the motion is DENIED AS MOOT. With regard to Count II ("Common Law Indemnity/Equitable Indemnity"), the motion is GRANTED. Signed by Magistrate Judge Shirley P. Mensah on 4/9/15. (JWD)

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 Missouri Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Harbison v. Rich Gullet and Sons, Inc.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Fred Harbison, Jr.
Represented By: Donald L. Schlapprizzi
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: Rich Gullet and Sons, Inc.
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 were retrieved from PACER, and should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.