Medical & Chiropractic Clinic, Inc. v. Oppenheim et al
Plaintiff: Medical & Chiropractic Clinic, Inc.
Defendant: David M. Oppenheim and Bock Law Firm, LLC
Case Number: 8:2016cv01477
Filed: June 8, 2016
Court: US District Court for the Middle District of Florida
Office: Tampa Office
County: Hillsborough
Presiding Judge: Charlene Edwards Honeywell
Presiding Judge: Thomas B. McCoun
Nature of Suit: Other Contract
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
August 3, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 221 ORDER: Plaintiff's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment 142 is DENIED. Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment 144 is GRANTED. All pending motions are DENIED as moot, except for Defendants' motion to disqualify Foley & Lardner, LLP 156 , which has been referred to the magistrate judge. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment in favor of Defendants David M. Oppenheim and Bock Law Firm, LLC and against Plaintiff Medical & Chiropractic Clinic, Inc. The Clerk is further directed to close this case. Signed by Judge Charlene Edwards Honeywell on 8/3/2018. (JJH)
June 11, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 203 1. Plaintiff's Unopposed Motion to Seal Unredacted Summary Judgment Exhibits 140 is GRANTED-IN-PART and DENIED-IN-PART. 2. Defendants' Unopposed Motion to Seal Summary Judgment Filings 143 is GRANTED-IN-PART and DENIED-IN-PART. 3 . Plaintiff's Unopposed Motion to Seal Unredacted Response to Summary Judgment and Exhibits 147 is GRANTED-IN-PART and DENIED-IN-PART. 4. Plaintiff's Unopposed Motion to Seal Portions of the Parties' Joint Stipulation of Facts [17 5] is GRANTED-IN-PART and DENIED-IN-PART. 5. The parties are permitted to file under seal or by redaction the specific portions of documents, if any, to which the statutory mediation privilege applies. The motions are otherwise DENIED, without prejudice. The remaining documents, or parts thereof, shall be filed un-redacted on or before June 18, 2018. Signed by Judge Charlene Edwards Honeywell on 6/11/2018. (SG)
October 19, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 71 ORDER denying 5 Motion for Preliminary Injunction. Signed by Judge Charlene Edwards Honeywell on 10/19/2016. (CDW)
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: Medical & Chiropractic Clinic, Inc. v. Oppenheim 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: Medical & Chiropractic Clinic, Inc.
Represented By: Christopher Lee Griffin
Represented By: Lauren Michelle Loew
Represented By: Jeffrey A. Soble
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: David M. Oppenheim
Represented By: Barry Blonien
Represented By: Phillip Bock
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: Bock Law Firm, LLC
Represented By: Phillip Bock
Represented By: James Dan Clark
Represented By: Daniel J. Cohen
Represented By: Jonathan B. Piper
Represented By: Christopher Stephen Polaszek
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?