Cody v. American Bankers Insurance Company of Florida

Justia Dockets & Filings Fifth Circuit Texas Northern District Cody v. American Bankers Insurance Company of Florida

Cody v. American Bankers Insurance Company of Florida

Plaintiff:	Jerry Cody
Defendant:	American Bankers Insurance Company of Florida
Case Number:	2:2014cv00187
Filed:	August 29, 2014
Court:	US District Court for the Northern District of Texas
Office:	Amarillo Office
County:	Randall
Presiding Judge:	Mary Lou Robinson
Nature of Suit:	Insurance
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 1441
Jury Demanded By:	None

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
October 21, 2015	Filing 49 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER DENYING 38 Defendant's MOTION for Summary Judgment. Defendant's Objections to Plaintiff's Summary Judgment Proof is DENIED as moot. Denial of this objection is not to be construed as a ruling tha t Robert Kitto is qualified to testify or may testify on any issues as an expert. Denial of this motion is not to be construed as a ruling that any proposed or anticipated trial testimony of this designated witness is, or is not, admissible. The Co urt will consider the admissibility of trial testimony if and when the expert is called, the expert's testimony is offered, and such offer is timely objected to by the Defendant. Plaintiff's 44 MOTION for Leave to Supplement Appendix to Plaintiff's Brief in Support of His Response to Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment and Brief in Support is DENIED AS MOOT. (Ordered by Judge Mary Lou Robinson on 10/21/2015) (chmb)

Date Filed

Document Text

October 21, 2015

Filing 49 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER DENYING 38 Defendant's MOTION for Summary Judgment. Defendant's Objections to Plaintiff's Summary Judgment Proof is DENIED as moot. Denial of this objection is not to be construed as a ruling tha t Robert Kitto is qualified to testify or may testify on any issues as an expert. Denial of this motion is not to be construed as a ruling that any proposed or anticipated trial testimony of this designated witness is, or is not, admissible. The Co urt will consider the admissibility of trial testimony if and when the expert is called, the expert's testimony is offered, and such offer is timely objected to by the Defendant. Plaintiff's 44 MOTION for Leave to Supplement Appendix to Plaintiff's Brief in Support of His Response to Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment and Brief in Support is DENIED AS MOOT. (Ordered by Judge Mary Lou Robinson on 10/21/2015) (chmb)

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 Texas Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Cody v. American Bankers Insurance Company of Florida
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: Jerry Cody
Represented By:	Wade Alan Byrd
Represented By:	Richard D Daly
Represented By:	Ana M Ene
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	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Defendant: American Bankers Insurance Company of Florida
Represented By:	Carter L Ferguson
Represented By:	April F Robbins
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	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| 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.

Why Is My Information Online?