Thornell v. Performance Imports LLC
||Performance Imports LLC
||March 7, 2016
||US District Court for the Northern District of Alabama
||John H England
|Nature of Suit:
|Cause of Action:
|Jury Demanded By:
Access additional case information on PACER
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|February 7, 2018
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER - As stated above, Performance and Khalidis motion to set aside default, (doc. 56), is GRANTED IN PART to the extent that the entry of default against Khalidi, (doc. 40), is SET ASIDE, and DENIED in all other respects. Thornells motions for sanctions, (docs. 17 & 41), are GRANTED IN PART to the extent that the stay currently in effect in this case is LIFTED, and DENIED to the extent they request other relief. The remaining parties are DIRECTED to meet and confer pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f) and submit their report of their planning meeting by February 28, 2018. Thornells motion for default judgment against Performance, (doc. 31), is DENIED with leave to refile by February 28, 2018. Signed by Magistrate Judge John H England, III on 2/7/2018. (KEK)
|August 3, 2016
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER - Because the plain language and most reasonable interpretation of the contract leads to the conclusion Defendants power of veto only extends to Plaintiffs opportunity to choose an organization other than the Ameri can Arbitration Association, there is no indication Plaintiff has refused to comply with the arbitration agreements provision for selecting an arbitrator. Accordingly, Defendants motion, (doc. 11), is DENIED. Signed by Magistrate Judge John H England, III on 8/3/2016. (KEK)
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?