Davis v. Old Dominion Freight Line et al

Plaintiff: Katherine Davis
Defendant: Old Dominion Freight Line and Melvin Howze
Case Number: 4:2013cv00589
Filed: October 8, 2013
Court: Arkansas Eastern District Court
Office: Little Rock Office
County: Pulaski
Presiding Judge: D. P. Marshall
Nature of Suit: Motor Vehicle
Cause of Action: 28:1441
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
March 3, 2016 139 Opinion or Order of the Court JUDGMENT: The complaint is dismissed with prejudice pursuant to the parties' settlement announced on the record at trial. The Court retains jurisdiction through 14 March 2016 to enforce the settlement. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 3/3/2016. (jak)
February 12, 2016 138 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER : For the reasons stated on the record at the 12 February 2016 hearing, Lewis's motion, 125 , is granted as modified, and Old Dominion and Howze's motion, 131 , is granted in part and denied in part. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 2/12/2016. (jak)
January 6, 2016 116 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER: The Court is attaching the key parts of its voir dire outline. Defendants' proposed questions, 108 , are noted and appreciated. To the extent some particular inquiry is not listed, those requested questions are rejected. The Court appreciates the exhibits provided today. We'll start at 9:00 a.m. sharp Monday morning. The venire should be in place by 9:30 a.m. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 1/6/2016. (jak)
December 22, 2015 106 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER: For the endorsed reasons, the Court sustains and overrules the parties' objections to the deposition designations as noted on 104 , attached. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 12/22/2015. (jak)
December 18, 2015 105 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER: The Court confirms the following rulings on the pending motions. 75 Motion is granted with a caveat: the Court will reconsider if Davis opens the door when explaining her incapacitation. 76 Motion is granted. 77 Motion to exclude eviden ce is granted in part as agreed, and denied on social security evidence. 78 Motion to exclude evidence is granted in part as agreed, and denied on Davis asking the jury to hold defendant's "accountable". She may do so. 80 Motion to exclude evidence is granted as agreed. 82 Motion is granted in part as to Howze's firing; denied on post-wreck testing. 84 Motion is granted as to Davis changing his opinion and denied on excluding Davis entirely. The Court orders the follo wing pretrial deadline. 18 December 2015 - File updated joint report on deposition designations. 31 December 2015 - Submit any suggested voir dire questions to chambers. 6 January 2016- Exchange exhibits with one electronic and two hard copies delivered to the Court. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 12/18/2015. (jak)
October 20, 2015 74 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER granting in part and denying in part 68 Motion. Moore's appearance is likely to foster impressions and inferences about her health; those can't reasonably be avoided. But Davis must keep Moore's health out of the spotlight - Moore's expert opinion, not her health, is the issue. If Moore is not at trial, the Court will explain her absence to the jury without mentioning Moore's health problems. The recording is not the place to do that. On all other points, respect and reasonableness should carry the parties through. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 10/20/2015. (jak)
May 29, 2015 58 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER: Old Dominion and Howze's motion for summary judgment, 27 , is denied. The parties should prepare for trial on 11 January 2016. The Court will hold a pretrial on 17 December 2015. A Third Amended Final Scheduling Order will issue. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 5/29/2015. (jak)
March 23, 2015 42 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER: The Second Amended Final Scheduling Order, 19 , is suspended and the 11 May 2015 trial is canceled. Motion to strike, 39 , is denied without prejudice as moot. Amended motion to strike, 41 , is granted on the alternative relief requested and otherwise denied. Davis may file a surreply by 31 March 2015. A Third Amended Final Scheduling Order will issue, if necessary, after the Court rules on the pending motions. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 3/23/2015. (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: Davis v. Old Dominion Freight Line et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Katherine Davis
Represented By: Gary J. Barrett
Represented By: Kathryn L. Hudson
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Old Dominion Freight Line
Represented By: Kara B. Mikles
Represented By: Amy Lynn Tracy
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Melvin Howze
Represented By: Kara B. Mikles
Represented By: Amy Lynn Tracy
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 [ 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?