Joe Hand Promotions, Inc. v. Bick et al
| Joe Hand Promotions, Inc. |
| Pamela Bick and City Limits Bar & Grill, Inc. |
| Cass Communications Management, Inc. |
| Pamela Bick |
| 3:2014cv03054 |
| February 11, 2014 |
| US District Court for the Central District of Illinois |
| Springfield Office |
| Adams |
| Sue E. Myerscough |
| Springfield Magistrate Judge |
| Cable/Satellite TV |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 |
| Defendant |
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
31
OPINION entered by U.S. Magistrate Judge Tom Schanzle-Haskins. Defendants / Third-Party Plaintiffs' Motion to Reconsider the Court's Order Requiring March 23, 2016, Deposition of Pamela Bick Occur in Chicago, Illinois 29 is DENIED; Defendants / Third-Party Plaintiffs' Motion to Clarify Order Requiring March 23, 2016, Deposition of Pamela Bick Occur in Chicago, Illinois 29 regarding Pamela Bick's status as a 30(b)(6) witness is ALLOWED. See written order. (LB, ilcd)
|
|
Filing
28
OPINION entered by U.S. Magistrate Judge Tom Schanzle-Haskins. Plaintiff Joe Hand Promotions, Inc.'s Motion for Default Judgment 24 is DENIED. See written order. (LB, ilcd)
|
|
Filing
16
OPINION: Third-Party Defendant Cass Communications Management, Inc.'s Motion to Dismiss the Third-Party Complaint of Defendants and Third-Party Plaintiffs Pamela Bick and City Limits Bar and Grill, Inc. 11 is DENIED. (SEE WRITTEN OPINION) Entered by Judge Sue E. Myerscough on 10/20/2014. (GL, ilcd)
|
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 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.
