Choice Construction, Inc. v. JMR Construction Corp. et al
| Choice Construction Inc. |
| Great American Insurance Company and JMR Construction Corp. |
| 2:2012cv00192 |
| February 6, 2012 |
| US District Court for the District of Nevada |
| Las Vegas Office |
| Larry R. Hicks |
| Peggy A. Leen |
| Contract: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Other Contract |
| 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
61
ORDER that absent compelling circumstances and a strong showing of good cause that the discovery could not be completed within the extended time allowed, no extensions will be granted. Signed by Magistrate Judge Peggy A. Leen on 5/18/2015. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DC)
|
|
Filing
39
ORDER Granting 38 Motion to Extend Discovery. Discovery due by 3/20/2013. Motions due by 4/17/2013. Signed by Magistrate Judge Peggy A. Leen on 8/9/12. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MMM)
|
|
Filing
35
ORDER Granting 19 Defendant JMR's Motion to Stay. Proceedings against JMR are stayed until the Federal Claims Court issues a final decision in 1:11-cv-187. JMR shall file status reports with this Court every three months. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that 21 Defendant Great American Insurance Company's Motion to Stay is DENIED. Signed by Judge Miranda M. Du on 7/16/12. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - EDS)
|
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 Nevada 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.
