Saenzpardo v. United Framing Construction Company et al
Steve Saenzpardo |
United Framing Construction Company and Matthew David Nero |
1:2010cv00049 |
January 27, 2010 |
US District Court for the Southern District of Alabama |
Mobile Office |
Baldwin |
Bert W. Milling |
Motor Vehicle |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Tort/Motor Vehicle (P.I.) |
Plaintiff |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 159 ORDER denying plaintiff's 157 Motion for New Trial. Signed by Judge Callie V. S. Granade on 1/18/2012. (mab) |
Filing 152 JUDGMENT entered in favor of United Framing Construction, Inc. and, Matthew David Nero against Steve Saenzpardo. Costs are to be taxed against the plaintiff. Signed by Judge Callie V. S. Granade on 12/2/2011. (mab) |
Filing 115 ORDER, plaintiff's 113 motion to alter or amend summary judgment pursuant to Rule 59(e) is DENIED, as are his requests to have the summary judgment order vacated, to hold a hearing on spoliation and discovery issues, and to modify the summary judgment order to a final judgment per Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b). Joint motion to stay proceedings is DENIED as MOOT. Signed by Judge Callie V. S. Granade on 10/31/2011. (mab) |
Filing 112 ORDER granting 58 Motion for Summary Judgment filed by United Framing Construction Company, Inc.; construing plaintiff's 103 Motion for Leave to File a motion to strike to be a motion to strike, and granting the motion to strike.Signed by Judge Callie V. S. Granade on 10/21/2011. (mab) |
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 Southern 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.