King v. CVS Caremark Corporation et al
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|Date Filed||#||Document Text|
|February 23, 2016
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER DENYING 197 MOTION for Judgment as a Matter of Law, CVS's 198 New Trial Motion and 199 Remittitur Motion are GRANTED IN PART and otherwise DENIED. CVS's separate request for oral argument (Doc. 200), filed on July 1, 2015, is DENIED. Finally, the deadline for Mr. King to indicate whether he consents to the Court's remittitur of compensatory damages by $450,000, and, therefore, the final judgment by $900,000, is due no later than 30 days from the entry date of this Order. Signed by Judge Virginia Emerson Hopkins on 2/23/2016. (JLC, )
|March 5, 2014
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER; For the reasons explained herein, CVS's Rule 56 Motion is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART, Mr. Berguson's Rule 56 Motion is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART, the Hardage Strike Motion is TERMED as MOOT, a nd the King Strike Motion and the Non-Party Strike Motion are DENIED IN PART and TERMED as MOOT IN PART. Finally, by separate Order the Court will set this case for a Final Pretrial Conference on those claims that remain in this lawsuit. Signed by Judge Virginia Emerson Hopkins on 3/5/2014. (JLC)
|July 20, 2012
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER DENYING 8 MOTION to Dismiss for Improper Venue or, to Transfer Venue. Additionally, the Clerk is DIRECTED to place Mr. King's unredacted charge (Doc. 8-2) under seal. Signed by Judge Virginia Emerson Hopkins on 7/20/2012. (JLC)
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 Northern 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 should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?