Royal v. New York Life Insurance Company et al
| Luther W. Royal |
| New York Life Insurance Company, The Paul Revere Life Insurance Company and Unum Group |
| 6:2010cv00104 |
| December 8, 2010 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Georgia |
| Statesboro Office |
| Evans |
| B. Avant Edenfield |
| G. R. Smith |
| Insurance |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Notice of Removal |
| 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
74
ORDER DISMISSING with prejudice all claims asserted in this matter. The Clerk shall terminate all deadlines and motions and close this case. Each party shall bear its own costs and fees. Signed by Judge J. Randal Hall on 05/26/2015. (thb)
|
|
Filing
64
ORDER granting 35 Motion for Summary Judgment; granting in part and denying in part 37 Motion for Summary Judgment; denying as moot 63 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply. This Order leaves Paul Revere's counterclaim agai nst Royal as the only live claim in this case. The Clerk is ORDERED to remove New York Life Insurance Company, Unum Group, and RCR from this case. Royal and Paul Revere are ORDERED to submit a pretrial order within 30 days. Signed by Judge B. Avant Edenfield on 1/26/15. (wwp)
|
|
Filing
29
ORDER granting 28 Joint MOTION to Modify re 23 Scheduling Order by New York Life Insurance Company, The Paul Revere Life Insurance Company, Unum Group. Signed by Magistrate Judge G. R. Smith on 3/5/2014. (loh)
|
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 Georgia Southern 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.
