United States of America v. McAdam et al
| United States of America |
| Toby Carl McAdam and Greta S. Armstrong |
| 1:2010cv00128 |
| October 13, 2010 |
| US District Court for the District of Montana |
| Billings Office |
| PARK |
| Richard F. Cebull |
| Other Food & Drug |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2201 |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
49
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS of Magistrate Ostby in full: granting 45 Plaintiff's Motion for Attorney Fees; denying 46 Defendant's Motion to Vacate Fines; adopting Findings and Recommendations re 47 ; granting 18 Plaint iff's Motion for Judgment, and granting 19 Plaintiff's Motion for Liquidated Damages in the amount of $80,000.00. Signed by Judge Sam E Haddon on 12/4/2013. (See Order for all specifics; Judgment to follow). Hard copy mailed to McAdam. (CAA, )
|
|
Filing
47
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Signed by Magistrate Carolyn S Ostby on 11/12/2013. IT IS RECOMMENDED that 18 Motion for a Judgment of Civil Contempt against McAdam be GRANTED, 19 Motion for Liquidated Damages be GRANTED, 45 Motion for Attorneys Fees & Costs be GRANTED, and 46 Motion to Vacate Fines be DENIED (See order for specifics.) (CLR) Copies mailed to Toby McAdam and Greta Armstrong. Modified on 11/12/2013 to edit text for clarification (CAA, ). Modified on 11/13/2013 to change to written opinion. (NOB)
|
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 Montana District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
