Sullivan & Associates LLC v. Prince et al
| Sullivan & Associates LLC |
| Gary Prince, Bryan Kidd and Sara Kidd |
| 3:2009cv00009 |
| January 22, 2009 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas |
| Copyright Office |
| Out of State |
| James M. Moody |
| Both |
| Federal Question |
| 17:101 Copyright Infringement |
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
50
ORDER DISMISSING CASE with prejudice pursuant to settlement. Signed by Judge James M. Moody on 2/16/2010. (jct)
|
|
Filing
48
ORDER granting 26 Plaintiff's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment. The Plaintiff owns a valid copyright in the Tranquility Plan 1429. Defendant Prince had "access" to the copyrighted material. Signed by Judge James M. Moody on 1/20/2010. (jct)
|
|
Filing
32
ORDER finding as moot 22 Plaintiff's Motion to Compel as it appears that the issues have been resolved. Plaintiff's request for attorneys fees is denied. Signed by Judge James M. Moody on 10/14/09. (jct)
|
|
Filing
20
ORDER, having been notified that a settlement has been reached between Plaintiff Thomas Marshall Sullivan & Separate Defendants Bryan & Sara Kidd, the complaint against Bryan & Sara Kidd is hereby dismissed with prejudice. Pursuant to 19 Notice of Dismissal of Crossclaim filed by Gary Prince, the crossclaim against Bryan & Sara Kidd is dismissed without prejudice. Signed by Judge James M. Moody on 7/22/09. (jct)
|
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 Arkansas Eastern 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.
