Mallory & Evans Contractors and Engineers, LLC v. Tuskegee University

Plaintiff: Mallory & Evans Contractors and Engineers, LLC
Defendant: Tuskegee University
Case Number: 3:2010cv00026
Filed: January 11, 2010
Court: Alabama Middle District Court
Office: Opelika Office
County: Macon
Referring Judge: Charles S. Coody
Presiding Judge: William Keith Watkins
Nature of Suit: Contract: Other
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed#Document Text
February 14, 2011 65 Opinion or Order of the Court MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER that M&E's 61 Rule 59(e) Motion to Reconsider and Alter or Amend is DENIED. Signed by Honorable William Keith Watkins on 2/14/2011. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Appeals Checklist)(cc, )

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 Alabama Middle District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Mallory & Evans Contractors and Engineers, LLC v. Tuskegee University
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Mallory & Evans Contractors and Engineers, LLC
Represented By: Robert Turner Meadows, III
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 ]
Defendant: Tuskegee University
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.


Why Is My Information Online?