Ivy v. Union Pacific Corporation et al
Plaintiff: Kenneth Dewayne Ivy
Defendant: Union Pacific Corporation and Union Pacific Railroad Company
Case Number: 3:2015cv00166
Filed: June 17, 2015
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas
Office: Jonesboro Office
County: Out of State
Presiding Judge: D. P. Marshall
Nature of Suit: Other Personal Injury
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332
Jury Demanded By: Both

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
September 7, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 81 ORDER continuing this case. A new trial date and scheduling deadlines will be set by separate order. Signed by Judge J. Leon Holmes on 9/7/2017. (jak)
July 31, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 66 ORDER granting in part and denying in part 64 Motion to Stay. The time within which Ivy must respond to the motions filed by Union Pacific Railroad Company is extended up to and including 8/14/2017. Signed by Judge J. Leon Holmes on 7/31/2017. (jak)
January 20, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 50 ORDER denying as moot 46 Motion to Strike. Signed by Judge J. Leon Holmes on 1/20/2017. (jak)
January 12, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 44 ORDER granting 38 Motion to Quash the deposition subpoena for Gary Wolf. The Court directs the lawyers to confer in an effort to reach an agreement for the time and place for Wolf's deposition. The discovery deadline of 1/19/2017 is extended for the sole purpose of permitting the plaintiff to depose Wolf in the event that the parties decide to reschedule the deposition at a later date. Signed by Judge J. Leon Holmes on 1/12/2017. (jak)
June 10, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 35 ORDER granting 34 Motion to extend the case scheduling deadlines. The final scheduling order previously entered is set aside, and this action is removed from the trial docket for the week of November 14, 2016. A new scheduling order with new deadlines will be entered separately. Signed by Judge J. Leon Holmes on 6/10/2016. (jak)
April 11, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 21 ORDER of Recusal. The Clerk must reassign this case at random by chip exchange. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 4/11/2016. (jak)
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 Arkansas Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Ivy v. Union Pacific Corporation et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Kenneth Dewayne Ivy
Represented By: Jason T. Brown
Represented By: Christopher Wesley Burks
Represented By: Lawrence Mann
Represented By: Michael G. Radigan
Represented By: Joshua Sanford
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Union Pacific Corporation
Represented By: Jamie Marie Huffman Jones
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Union Pacific Railroad Company
Represented By: Jamie Marie Huffman Jones
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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.


Why Is My Information Online?