Dream Custom Homes, Inc. v. Modern Day Construction, Inc. et al
Plaintiff: Dream Custom Homes, Inc.
Defendant: Modern Day Construction, Inc. and Anthony Piarulli
Case Number: 8:2008cv01189
Filed: June 19, 2008
Court: US District Court for the Middle District of Florida
Office: Copyright Office
County: Pasco
Presiding Judge: Elizabeth A. Jenkins
Presiding Judge: Elizabeth A. Kovachevich
Nature of Suit: Both
Cause of Action: Federal Question
Jury Demanded By: 17:501 Copyright Infringement

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
January 31, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 185 ORDER adopting 180 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION re 162 MOTION for attorney fees filed by PAR Custom Drafting, INC., Phillip Roush, granting Motion in the amount of $19,624.50, directing Clerk of Court to enter final judgment in favor of Defendants PAR Custom Drafting, Inc. and Phillip Roush. The Court retains jurisdiction to adjudicate the charging lien of Defendants' counsel. Signed by Judge Elizabeth A. Kovachevich on 1/31/2013. (JM)
April 23, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 153 ORDER adopting 150 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION re Motions for Attorney's Fees and Costs (Dkts. 116, 117, 120), Motions for Review of Clerk's Order Taxing Mediation Costs (Dkts. 138, 139, 140) and Motions for Stay of Payment (Dkts. 138, 139 , 140), overruling objection to Report and Recommendation, granting Motions for Attorney's Fees and Costs, granting Motions for Review of Clerk's Order Taxing Mediation Costs, denying Motions to Stay Payment. The Clerk of Court shall enter a final judgment in favor of each Defendant and against Plaintiff for each Defendant's award of attorney's fees. The prior cost judgments are vacated. The Clerk of Court shall enter a final judgment awarding costs in favor of Defendant Modern Day Construction, Inc. and against Plaintiff. Signed by Judge Elizabeth A. Kovachevich on 4/23/2012. (JM)
February 22, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 110 ORDER granting 78 Motion for summary judgment; granting 90 Motion for summary judgment; denying as moot 95 Motion for leave to file Reply; granting 101 Motion for summary judgment. The Request for Judicial Notice is denied as moot. The Clerk of Court shall enter a final judgment in favor of Defendants and close this case. Signed by Judge Elizabeth A. Kovachevich on 2/22/2011. (Attachments: # 1 Main Document, # 2 Main Document, # 3 Exhibit) (JM)
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: Dream Custom Homes, Inc. v. Modern Day Construction, 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: Dream Custom Homes, Inc.
Represented By: H. William Larson, Jr.
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: Modern Day Construction, 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: Anthony Piarulli
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?