Coorstek Inc v. Electric Melting Services Company Inc

Case Number: 4:2006cv01726
Filed: December 27, 2006
Court: Arkansas Eastern District Court
Office: Little Rock Office
Presiding Judge: George Howard
Nature of Suit: Tort Product Liability
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed#Document Text
March 10, 2009 90 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER granting 86 plaintiff's Motion for Attorney Fees in the amount of $44,607.00 and costs in the amount of $350.00. Signed by Judge James M. Moody on 3/10/09. (bkp)
February 12, 2009 84 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER denying 71 Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law, or in the alternative, for a new trial. Signed by Judge James M. Moody on 2/12/09. (bkp)
December 8, 2008 67 Opinion or Order of the Court JUDGMENT in favor of CoorsTek Inc against Electric Melting Services Company Inc re 66 Order in the sum of $77,576.00, together with interest from this date until paid at the rate of.96% per annum, together with costs as the Court may find allowable. Signed by Judge James M. Moody on 12/8/08. (bkp)
December 2, 2008 59 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER granting in part and denying in part 55 Motion in Limine. Signed by Judge James M. Moody on 12/2/08. (bkp)

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: Coorstek Inc v. Electric Melting Services Company Inc
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ 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?