Slaugh v. Neidigh
Plaintiff: Roxanne L Slaugh
Defendant: Marianne Poseley Wagner Marrquardt Neidigh
Case Number: 2:2015cv00555
Filed: November 24, 2015
Court: US District Court for the District of Idaho
Office: CDA - Northern Office
County: Kootenai - Northern
Presiding Judge: Edward J. Lodge
Nature of Suit: Other Contract
Cause of Action: 28:1332
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
July 9, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 115 MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER It is hereby ORDERED that (1) Defendant's Motion for Enforcement of Judgment and Sanctions (Docket No. 98 ), and (2) Plaintiff's Cross-Motion for Enforcement of Judgment and Sanctions (Docket No. 107 ) are ea ch GRANTED, in part, and DENIED, in part. ( The parties shall submit 2 status reports via CM/ECF one on or before 7/20/18, the other on or before 7/31/18.) Signed by Judge Ronald E. Bush. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by (jp)
September 28, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 78 MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER RE: DEFENDANTS MOTION TO ENFORCE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT (Docket No. 66 ) - granting in part and denying in part 66 Defendants Motion to Enforce Settlement Agreement; denying as moot 37 Defendants Motion to Strike Pla intiffs Designation of Expert orOther Remedies; denying as moot 38 Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment; denying as moot 49 Defendants Reply to Plaintiffs Objection to Motion to Strike Plaintiffs Designation of Expert or Other Remedies. Signed by Judge Ronald E. Bush. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by (cjs)
August 18, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 20 MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER RE: DEFENDANTS MOTION TO DISMISS FOR LACKOF DIVERSITY JURISDICTION AND ABSTENTION - IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Diversity Jurisdiction and Abstention (Docket No. 3 ) is GRANTED, in part, and DENIED, in part, as follows: 1. Diversity jurisdiction exists. Defendants Motion to Dismiss is denied in this respect; 2. Abstention does not apply. Defendants Motion to Dismiss is denied in this respect. 3. The probate exception will not be applied in toto. Defendants Motion to Dismiss is denied in this respect. However, the Court will apply the probate exception to Plaintiffsclaims related to the at-issue codicil. Defendants Motion to Dismiss is granted in this limited respect. Signed by Judge Ronald E. Bush. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by (cjs)
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 Idaho District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Slaugh v. Neidigh
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Roxanne L Slaugh
Represented By: Mischelle R Fulgham
Represented By: Tori Jade Osler
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: Marianne Poseley Wagner Marrquardt Neidigh
Represented By: Brian J Simpson
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?