A & B Asphalt, Inc. et al v. Humbert Asphalt, Inc. et al
||Dan Humbert, Brad Humbert, John Does 1-5 and Humbert Asphalt, Inc.
||A & B Asphalt, Inc.
||January 18, 2013
||Oregon District Court
||Pendleton (2) Office
|Nature of Suit:
||Personal Property: Other
|Cause of Action:
|Jury Demanded By:
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|Date Filed||#||Document Text|
|June 26, 2013
ORDER on Motion to Take Limited Discovery and File Sur-Reply 25 . plaintiff's Motion for Leave to Take Limited Discovery (doc. # 25 ) is GRANTED, in part, as follows: The issuance of subpoenas for the depositions of Kenneth Hanafin and J ohn Royse is allowed. The depositions shall be limited to subjects addressed in Hanafin's signed witness statement and draft declaration, to subjects addressed in Royse's draft declaration and the reason for Mr. Royse declining to sign the declaration. The motion is DENIED with regard to the depositions of Don Bush and Greg Basel. Further, plaintiff's Motion to File a Sur-Reply is GRANTED. Upon completion of the depositions, plaintiff shall submit its Sur-Reply within 10 days. Defendants may respond to the Sur-Reply within 10 days of its filing. Signed on 6/26/2013 by Magistrate Judge Patricia Sullivan. (jtj)
|July 24, 2014
ORDER - The Court ADOPTS IN PART Judge Sullivan's Findings and Recommendation, Dkt. 71 . The Court adopts all portions of the F&R except for the finding relating to the causation element of the CPA claim, which the Court need not reach to resolve the pending motions. A&B's motion to dismiss is GRANTED and motion to strike is GRANTED IN PART. Humbert's two counterclaims are dismissed and its sixth and seventh affirmative defenses are stricken, without prejudice. A&B's motion to strike Humbert's first, second, and eighth affirmative defenses is DENIED. Signed on 7/24/2014 by Judge Michael H. Simon. (mja)
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 Oregon 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.