McCollum v. UPS Ground Freight Incorporated et al
| Stephanie McCollum |
| Wilmer Santos-Maldanado, Unknown Parties, UPS Ground Freight Incorporated and Alfredo Duenas |
| 2:2011cv00961 |
| May 13, 2011 |
| US District Court for the District of Arizona |
| Phoenix Division Office |
| Maricopa |
| David G Campbell |
| Motor Vehicle |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 |
| Defendant |
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
164
ORDER denying 157 Motion for New Trial. Signed by Judge David G Campbell on 3/18/2013.(NVO)
|
|
Filing
140
ORDER granting 138 Motion for Directed Verdict re punitive damages. Signed by Judge David G Campbell on 1/16/2013.(NVO)
|
|
Filing
132
ORDER granting in part and denying in part 108 Motion in Limine. Signed by Judge David G Campbell on 1/11/2013.(NVO)
|
|
Filing
131
ORDER granting 122 Motion for Reconsideration. Signed by Judge David G Campbell on 1/8/2013.(NVO)
|
|
Filing
86
ORDER denying 85 Motion for Reconsideration. Signed by Judge David G Campbell on 9/17/2012.(NVO)
|
|
Filing
81
ORDER granting 64 Motion for Partial Summary Judgment; granting in part and denying in part 77 Motion for Partial Summary Judgment. The Court will set a final pretrial conference by separate order. Signed by Judge David G Campbell on 8/30/2012.(NVO)
|
|
Filing
59
ORDER denying 49 Motion to Strike. Signed by Judge David G Campbell on 4/4/2012.(NVO)
|
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 Arizona 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.
