Thomas v. Bombardier, Inc. et al
Plaintiff: Christine Thomas
Defendant: Bombardier, Inc. and Bombardier Corporation
Case Number: 2:2007cv00730
Filed: November 6, 2007
Court: US District Court for the Middle District of Florida
Office: Ft. Myers Office
County: Lee
Presiding Judge: Thomas G. Wilson
Presiding Judge: John E. Steele
Nature of Suit: Marine Product Liability
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
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 7, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 156 OPINION AND ORDER denying 148 Motion for new trial; denying 154 Motion for new trial. Signed by Judge John E. Steele on 12/7/2010. (RKR)
October 20, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 117 OPINION AND ORDER granting 68 Motion in limine; granting 69 Motion in limine; denying 70 Motion in limine; granting in part and denying in part 71 Motion in limine; denying 72 Motion in limine; granting 73 Motion in limine; granting in pa rt and denying in part 74 Motion in limine; granting 75 Motion in limine; denying 76 Motion in limine; denying 77 Motion in limine; denying without prejudice 84 Motion in limine. See Opinion and Order for details. Except to the extent inc onsistent with this Opinion and Order, the 80 Joint Pre-Trial Statement shall govern; jurors in the case will be allowed to take notes; a final status conference concerning exhibits will be held on October 25, 2010 at 4:00 p.m., and trial will begi n on October 26, 2010 at 9:00 a.m. Defendant's 90 Renewed Objections to Plaintiffs Exhibit List and Motion to Strike Amended Exhibit List are denied for the reasons stated at the final pretrial conference. Signed by Judge John E. Steele on 10/20/2010. (RKR)
July 9, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 57 OPINION AND ORDER denying 51 Motion in limine. Signed by Judge John E. Steele on 7/9/2010. (RKR)
January 21, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 44 OPINION AND ORDER granting in part and denying in part 30 Motion for Partial Summary Judgment. The Motion is granted as to the adequacy of the Warning language in 14(g) and (m) and 21(y) and (ee) of the failure to warn claims in Counts I and II, b ut is denied as to the issue of placement of the Warning. The Motion is granted as to the duty to recall and retrofit under 14(h) in Count I and 21(z) in Count II. The Clerk shall withhold the entry of judgment until the conclusion of the case. Signed by Judge John E. Steele on 1/21/2010. (RKR)
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 Florida Middle District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Thomas v. Bombardier, 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: Christine Thomas
Represented By: Robert A. Selig
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: Bombardier, Inc.
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: Bombardier Corporation
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?