Curtis v. Crop Production Services Inc

Defendant: Crop Production Services Inc
Plaintiff: Clay Curtis
Case Number: 5:2013cv00986
Filed: September 12, 2013
Court: Oklahoma Western District Court
Office: Oklahoma City Office
County: Texas
Presiding Judge: David L. Russell
Nature of Suit: Other Contract
Cause of Action: 28:1332
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
August 25, 2014 101 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER granting in part and denying in part 67 Motion for Leave to; granting 72 Motion for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery; granting 76 Motion to Quash; granting 77 Motion for Protective Order; granting 88 Motion to Expedite; granting 89 Motion to Expedite, as more fully set out. Signed by Honorable David L. Russell on 8/25/14. (jw)

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 Oklahoma Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Curtis v. Crop Production Services Inc
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Crop Production Services 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 ]
Plaintiff: Clay Curtis
Represented By: Lane M Claussen
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 should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.