Alabama Aircraft Industries Inc et al v. Boeing Company, The et al
| Alabama Aircraft Industries Inc, Alabama Aircraft Industries Inc Birmingham and Pemco Aircraft Engineering Services Inc |
| Boeing Company, The, Boeing Aerospace Operations Inc and Boeing Aerospace Support Center |
| 2:2011cv03577 |
| October 7, 2011 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Alabama |
| Southern Office |
| Jefferson |
| R David Proctor |
| Other Contract |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
670
MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge R David Proctor on 10/26/20022. (KAM)
|
|
Filing
445
MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge R David Proctor on 8/15/2018. (KAM)
|
|
Filing
310
MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge R David Proctor on 3/9/2017. (AVC)
|
|
Filing
304
ORDER-re: Report and Recommendation 261 . The court hereby ADOPTS the Report and ACCEPTS the recommendations of the Special Master. It is ORDERED that to the extent that Boeing's Motion seeks immediate production of the Requested Documents, t he Motion is DENIED. The motion is GRANTED to the extent that Boeing is entitled to any Requested Documents not covered by the work product doctrine. AAI SHALL produce a privilege log that details the application of the work product doctrine on a document-by-document basis by 2/3/2017. If Boeing wishes to challenge any of AAI's work product assertions, it may do, filing challenges by 2/26/2017. Signed by Judge R David Proctor on 1/13/2017. (AVC)
|
|
Filing
268
ORDER -RE: Special Master Report and Recommendation 237 . The court hereby ADOPTS the Reports and Accepts the recommendations of the Special Master. It is ORDERED that Boeing's Motion to Compel AAI's Response to Boeing's Interrogatory No. 1 and Requests for Admissions Nos. 6,14,15,16 and 20 is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as set out. Signed by Judge R David Proctor on 9/8/2016. (AVC)
|
|
Filing
199
ORDER -re: Report and Recommendation 182 containing the recommendation that Boeing's Motion to Compel Testimony on Topic 5, 20, and 32 of Boeings Rule 30(b)(6) Deposition Notice be granted. The court hereby ADOPTS the Reports of the Special M aster and ACCEPTS the recommendations. It is ORDERED that Boeing's Motion to Compel is GRANTED. AAI SHALL provide corporate testimony in the manner proposed in Boeings Notice (Topic 32) and July 21, 2015 letter (Topics 5 and 20). Signed by Judge R David Proctor on 3/16/2016. (AVC)
|
|
Filing
186
ORDER -re: Report and Recommendation of Special Master 176 & 178 . The court ADOPTS the Reports and ACCEPTS the recommendations of the Special Master. It is ORDERED that AAI's Motion for Additional Time to Complete Cross-Examination of Gle nn Hess is GRANTED. AAI will be permitted to continue its cross-examination of Mr. Hess for one-and-a-half hours; if necessary, Boeing may follow with up to one hour of re-direct examination. AAI's Motion to Compel Boeing to Testify is GRANTED. Boeing SHALL comply with AAI's Proposal, with the caveats that AAI will include no more than two hundred document families on List B, and limit its examination questions about those documents (aside from authenticity) to who at Boeing had access to the documents during the relevant period (as opposed to the entire internal transfer history of the documents). Signed by Judge R David Proctor on 2/12/2016. (AVC)
|
|
Filing
55
MEMORANDUM OPINION-re: Dfts' Motion to Dismiss Pltf's Second Amended Complaint 39 . Signed by Judge R David Proctor on 3/20/2013. (AVC)
|
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
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
