Burdett v. Matson Navigation Company, Inc.

Justia Dockets & Filings Ninth Circuit Hawaii District Court Burdett v. Matson Navigation Company, Inc.

Burdett v. Matson Navigation Company, Inc.

Plaintiff:	Cassandra Burdett
Defendant:	Matson Navigation Company, Inc.
Case Number:	1:2013cv00703
Filed:	December 19, 2013
Court:	US District Court for the District of Hawaii
Office:	Hawaii Office
County:	Honolulu
Presiding Judge:	KEVIN S.C. CHANG
Presiding Judge:	ALAN C KAY
Nature of Suit:	Marine
Cause of Action:	46 U.S.C. § 688
Jury Demanded By:	Plaintiff

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed	Document Text
January 30, 2015	Filing 157 ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT 88 , DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 82 , AND GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STRIKE 144 . Signed by JUDGE ALAN C KAY on 1 /30/2015. MOTION to Strike, doc. 144 is Defendant Matson Navigation Company, Inc.'s Motion to Strike Plaintiff's "Separate Concise Statement of Facts in Support of Plaintiff's Reply to Defendants Opposition to her Motion for Summary Judgment" (doc 139 ) and the new evidence submitted therewith. Written Order follows January 27, 2015 hearing on the above-referenced motions. Minutes of hearing: doc no. 152 (afc)< center>CERTIFICATE OF SERVICEParticipants registered to receive electronic notifications received this document electronically at the e-mail address listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF). Participants not registered to receive electronic notifications were served by first class mail on the date of this docket entry

Date Filed

Document Text

January 30, 2015

Filing 157 ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT 88 , DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 82 , AND GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STRIKE 144 . Signed by JUDGE ALAN C KAY on 1 /30/2015. MOTION to Strike, doc. 144 is Defendant Matson Navigation Company, Inc.'s Motion to Strike Plaintiff's "Separate Concise Statement of Facts in Support of Plaintiff's Reply to Defendants Opposition to her Motion for Summary Judgment" (doc 139 ) and the new evidence submitted therewith. Written Order follows January 27, 2015 hearing on the above-referenced motions. Minutes of hearing: doc no. 152 (afc)< center>CERTIFICATE OF SERVICEParticipants registered to receive electronic notifications received this document electronically at the e-mail address listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF). Participants not registered to receive electronic notifications were served by first class mail on the date of this docket entry

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 Hawaii District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Burdett v. Matson Navigation Company, Inc.
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: Cassandra Burdett
Represented By:	Harold G. Hoppe
Represented By:	Robert K. Lansden
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: Matson Navigation Company, 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 ]

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?