Kennedy v. Supreme Forest Products, Inc. et al
Plaintiff: Michael Kennedy
Defendant: Supreme Forest Products, Inc. and Supreme Industries, Inc.
Case Number: 3:2014cv01851
Filed: December 10, 2014
Court: US District Court for the District of Connecticut
Office: New Haven Office
County: Litchfield
Presiding Judge: Jeffrey A. Meyer
Nature of Suit: Employment
Cause of Action: No cause code entered
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
December 15, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 213 ORDER ON POST-TRIAL MOTIONS. Defendant's motions for judgment as a matter of law and/or for a new trial (Docs. # 156 , # 175 ) are GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. The motions are DENIED except to the extent that the punitive damages award sh all be reduced to $250,000. Plaintiff's motion for costs and fees (Doc. # 174 ) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Defendant shall pay plaintiff costs and fees in the amount of $139,106.72 The Clerk of Court shall enter an amended judgment reducing the punitive damages award to $250,000 and adding the Court's award of $127,835 in attorneys fees and $11,271.72 in costs.Signed by Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer on 12/15/2017. (Lombard, N.)
May 25, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 155 MEMORANDUM RE THE STANDARD OF PROOF: Please see the attached memorandum. Signed by Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer on 5/25/2017. (Townsend, D.)
May 22, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 151 RULING ON PENDING MOTIONS RE AUDIO RECORDINGS AND PHOTOGRAPHS. For the reasons set forth in the attached ruling, defendants' motions in limine to exclude the audio recordings (Doc. # 105 and # 145 ) are DENIED. Defendants' motion fo r sanctions against plaintiff (Doc. # 140 ) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Plaintiff shall not be permitted to use or reference the late-disclosed photographs of his truck's suspension gauge. The Court otherwise declines to enter an order to require plaintiff to pay attorneys fees and costs. It is so ordered. Signed by Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer on 5/22/2017. (Gruber, Sarah)
November 19, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 91 Defendants' motion for summary judgment as to plaintiff Kennedy (Doc. # 61 ) is DENIED. Defendants' motion for summary judgment as to plaintiff Welch (Doc. # 66 ) is GRANTED. See attached ruling. Signed by Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer on 11/19/2016. (Townsend, D.)
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 Connecticut District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Kennedy v. Supreme Forest Products, Inc. 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: Michael Kennedy
Represented By: Emanuele Robert Cicchiello
Represented By: Michael John Reilly
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: Supreme Forest Products, Inc.
Represented By: Lisa A. Zaccardelli
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: Supreme Industries, Inc.
Represented By: Lisa A. Zaccardelli
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?