BOUCHOT et al v. GREEN-SIMMONS COMPANY, INC. et al
| ROY BOUCHOT, RIGO TOMAS, ZOIBER ROBLERO, HUGO GONZALEZ, JOSE HERNANDEZ, JOEL PEREZ and RACIEL ORTIZ |
| GREEN-SIMMONS COMPANY, INC., ADVENTURE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC., WADE ADAMS and GRANT HOLMES |
| 3:2009cv00434 |
| September 25, 2009 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Florida |
| Pensacola Office |
| Escambia |
| M CASEY RODGERS |
| ELIZABETH M TIMOTHY |
| Plaintiff |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 Fed. Question: Fair Labor Standards |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
67
ORDER OF DISMISSAL - re 66 - The above-entitled action is DISMISSED from the active docket of the court. (see order image) - - -Signed by District Judge M CASEY RODGERS on September 29, 2010. (cbj)
|
|
Filing
64
ORDER - 1. Dfts' 58 MOTION for Sanctions is GRANTED as to Plaintiffs Rigo Tomas and Jose Hernandez, and their claims are accordingly dismissed with prejudice. The motion for sanctions is DENIED as to Plaintiff Roy Bouchot. - 2. Dfts' 54 Consent MOTION for Enlargement of Time is DENIED as moot. - 3. Plaintiffs shall file within seven days a notice of intent advising the court of how they plan to proceed with regard to Dfts Wade Adams and Adventure Construction Company, Inc., against whom the Clerk has entered a default (doc 32 ). - - (Miscellaneous Deadline - by 9/27/2010. ) - - - Signed by District Judge M CASEY RODGERS on September 20, 2010. (cbj)
|
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 Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
