Rudel v. Hawaii Management Alliance Association
Petitioner: Randy Rudel
Respondent: Hawaii Management Alliance Association
Case Number: 1:2015cv00539
Filed: December 29, 2015
Court: US District Court for the District of Hawaii
Office: Hawaii Office
County: Honolulu
Presiding Judge: BARRY M. KURREN
Presiding Judge: J. MICHAEL SEABRIGHT
Nature of Suit: Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974
Cause of Action: 29 U.S.C. ยง 1001
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
October 31, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 64 ORDER (1) GRANTING IN PART PETITIONER'S MOTION FOR DETERMINATION OF VALIDITY OF LIEN, ECF NO. 38 ; AND (2) DENYING RESPONDENT'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT, ECF NO. 40 . Signed by CHIEF JUDGE J. MICHAEL SEABRIGHT on 10/31/2017. ( afc) Order furthermore directs parties to meet and confer, and then contact Magistrate Judge Richard Puglisi by November 7, 2017 to schedule a status conference "to address whether any further proceedings are necessary to dete rmine the amount, if any, of HMAA's lien (and if so, what type of proceeding, e.g., evidentiary submissions or a trial)." WRITTEN ORDER follows hearing held July 24, 2017. Minutes of hearing: ECF no. 54 . CE RTIFICATE 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.
August 1, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 26 ORDER REJECTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION TO GRANT PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO REMAND, DOC. NO. 15 . Signed by CHIEF U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE J. MICHAEL SEABRIGHT on 8/1/2016. (afc)Petitioner/Plain tiff Randy Rudel's MOTION to Remand: doc no. 10 . 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). All participants are registered to receive electronic notifications.
March 31, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 15 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION TO GRANT PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO REMAND (DOC. 10 ). Signed by MAGISTRATE JUDGE BARRY M. KURREN on 3/31/2016. (afc)CERTIFICATE OF SERVICEParticipants registered to receive electro nic 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: Rudel v. Hawaii Management Alliance Association
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Randy Rudel
Represented By: Robert A. Creps
Represented By: Michael R. Cruise
Represented By: Woodruff K. Soldner
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 ]
Respondent: Hawaii Management Alliance Association
Represented By: Jordon Jun Kimura
Represented By: David J. Minkin
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?