Poeppel, et al v. OmaRail, et al
||OmaRail and Digger Specialties, Inc.
||Christopher Poeppel and Sharon E. Poeppel
||December 13, 2012
||Nebraska District Court
||4 Lincoln Office
||Cheryl R. Zwart
|Nature of Suit:
|Cause of Action:
||28:1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
|Jury Demanded By:
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|Date Filed||#||Document Text|
|November 22, 2013
ORDER- The trial and pretrial conference are continued pending further order of the court. A telephonic conference with the undersigned magistrate judge will be held on January 6, 2014 at 10:30 a.m. to discuss the status of case progression and potential settlement. Counsel for plaintiff shall place the call. ( Telephone Conference set for 1/6/2014 at 10:30 AM by telephone before Magistrate Judge Cheryl R. Zwart.) Ordered by Magistrate Judge Cheryl R. Zwart. (MKR)
|March 26, 2014
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - The court has been advised that the parties in the above-captioned matter have settled their claims. Within thirty (30) calendar days of the date of this order, the parties shall file a joint stipulation for dismissal (or other dispositive stipulation) with the clerk of the court, together with submitting to the trial judge a draft order which will fully dispose of the case. Absent compliance with this order, this case (including all counterclaims and the like) may be dismissed without further notice. The clerk shall terminate the pretrial and trial settings for this case. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Cheryl R. Zwart. (MKR)
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 Nebraska 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 were retrieved from PACER, and should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.