Jones Stephens Corp v. Costal Ningbo Hardware Manufacturing Co., LTD et al
| Jones Stephens Corp |
| Costal Ningbo Hardware Manufacturing Co., LTD, Great American E & S Insurance Co. and Gemini Insurance Company |
| 2:2017cv00748 |
| May 9, 2017 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Alabama |
| Southern Office |
| St. Clair |
| John H England |
| Insurance |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
| None |
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
120
MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Chief Judge Karon O Bowdre on 6/7/2019. (JLC)
|
|
Filing
114
MEMORANDUM OPINION - By separate order, the court will DENY IN PART and GRANT IN PART the motions to dismiss. Specifically, the court will DENY the motions to dismiss as to (1) Count Five for civil conspiracy against Great American, New Century, and AmWINS; and (2) Count Six for negligence and wantonness against Great American. The court will GRANT the motions to dismiss as to (1) Count Six for negligence and wantonness against New Century and AmWINS; (2) Count Seven for negligent and wanton fai lure to procure insurance against New Century and AmWINS; (3) Count Eight for unjust enrichment against Great American, New Century, and AmWINS; and (4) Count Nine for tortious interference with contract against Great American, New Century, and AmWINS. Signed by Chief Judge Karon O Bowdre on 4/1/2019. (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
- 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.
