Grigoleit Company v. Whirlpool Corporation

Justia Dockets & Filings Seventh Circuit Illinois Central District Grigoleit Company v. Whirlpool Corporation

Grigoleit Company v. Whirlpool Corporation

Plaintiff:	Grigoleit Company
Defendant:	Whirlpool Corporation
Case Number:	2:2005cv02126
Filed:	May 27, 2005
Court:	US District Court for the Central District of Illinois
Office:	Urbana Office
County:	Macon
Presiding Judge:	Michael P. McCuskey
Nature of Suit:	Other Contract
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 1441
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 3, 2014	Filing 67 OPINION entered by Judge Colin Stirling Bruce on 1/3/14. Grigoleit's Motions for Partial Summary Judgment 56 57 are DENIED. Whirlpool's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment 55 is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Grigoleit's Motion for an Amended Scheduling Order 65 is GRANTED. The parties are directed to contact the court, at their convenience, to arrange a status conference to discuss the case or to set a date for a settlement conference, supervised mediation, or bench trial. See written Opinion. (KM, ilcd)
May 10, 2010	Filing 49 OPINION entered by Chief Judge Michael P. McCuskey on 5/10/10 granting 40 Motion for Partial Summary Judgment. Whirlpool's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on the Non-Arbitrable Issue of Damages 40 is GRANTED. Grigoleit may only recover the money royalties, and not breach of contract damages, if Whirlpool is found by the arbitrator to be in violation of the License Agreement. See written Order. (SLJ, ilcd)

Date Filed

Document Text

January 3, 2014

Filing 67 OPINION entered by Judge Colin Stirling Bruce on 1/3/14. Grigoleit's Motions for Partial Summary Judgment 56 57 are DENIED. Whirlpool's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment 55 is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Grigoleit's Motion for an Amended Scheduling Order 65 is GRANTED. The parties are directed to contact the court, at their convenience, to arrange a status conference to discuss the case or to set a date for a settlement conference, supervised mediation, or bench trial. See written Opinion. (KM, ilcd)

May 10, 2010

Filing 49 OPINION entered by Chief Judge Michael P. McCuskey on 5/10/10 granting 40 Motion for Partial Summary Judgment. Whirlpool's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on the Non-Arbitrable Issue of Damages 40 is GRANTED. Grigoleit may only recover the money royalties, and not breach of contract damages, if Whirlpool is found by the arbitrator to be in violation of the License Agreement. See written Order. (SLJ, ilcd)

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 Illinois Central District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Grigoleit Company v. Whirlpool Corporation
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: Grigoleit Company
Represented By:	R Samuel Postlewait
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: Whirlpool Corporation
Represented By:	J A Cragwall, Jr
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?