Jones et al v. Dallas Neurosurgical and Spine Associates PA et al
Plaintiff:
Alan W Jones and Kathryn Marie Jones
Defendant:
Dallas Neurosurgical and Spine Associates PA, Jeremy Denning, Richard Jackson, Texas Health Presbyterian Hospital of Dallas, Medtronic Corporation, James Sherman, Josh Tsokanas, Nora Jean Enty and Unknown Parties
Case Number:
2:2012cv02286
Filed:
October 25, 2012
Court:
Arizona District Court
Office:
Phoenix Division Office
County:
Maricopa
Presiding Judge:
Bridget S Bade
Nature of Suit:
Personal Injury: Med. Malpractice
Cause of Action:
28:1332 Diversity-Medical Malpractice
Jury Demanded By:
Plaintiff
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Date Filed | # | Document Text |
|---|---|---|
| February 14, 2013 | 41 |
ORDER denying 39 Motion to Enlarge Time; granting 10 Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction; granting 13 Motion to Dismiss; granting 18 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim without prejudice. Again (see doc. 38 ), we stron gly urge plaintiffs to seek the advice of counsel. It is difficult for a party to successfully manage the complexities of a lawsuit unaided by a lawyer. Lawyers serve the important function of evaluating a case and guiding parties through the legal process. In light of plaintiffs' claims of medical problems, they especially would do well to obtain a lawyer. The clerk is directed to enter final judgment dismissing this action without prejudice. Signed by Judge Frederick J Martone on 2/13/13. (LAD)
|
| January 29, 2013 | 38 |
ORDER - IT IS ORDERED GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART plaintiffs' motion (doc. 25). IT IS ORDERED DENYING plaintiffs' motion to vacate case reassignment. IT IS ORDERED GRANTING plaintiffs' motion to amend. IT IS ORDERED DENYING pl aintiffs' motion to strike. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED DENYING plaintiffs' motion to strike or alternatively enlarge time (doc. 27). IT IS FURTHER ORDERED GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART plaintiffs' motions for extension of time (docs. 35, 36). IT IS ORDERED DENYING plaintiffs' motion for a sixth-month enlargement of time. IT IS ORDERED GRANTING plaintiffs an extension of 10 days after the date of this order to file their responses to the motions to dismiss. Plaintiffs have up to and including February 8, 2013, to file responses to defendants' motions to dismiss (docs. 13, 18). (See document for full details). Signed by Judge Frederick J Martone on 1/29/13. (LAD)
|
Access additional case information on PACER
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.
