SHEDLOCK v. VISTEON CORPORATION

SHEDLOCK v. VISTEON CORPORATION

Plaintiff:	EDWARD SHEDLOCK
Defendant:	VISTEON CORPORATION
Case Number:	1:2009cv00627
Filed:	May 19, 2009
Court:	US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana
Office:	Indianapolis Office
County:	XX US, Outside State
Presiding Judge:	David Frank Hamilton
Presiding Judge:	Debra McVicker Lynch
Nature of Suit:	Labor: E.R.I.S.A.
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Jury Demanded By:	None

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
October 24, 2012	Filing 84 CLOSED JUDGMENT-Through orders dated 7/16/2012 and 10/24/2012, the Court granted s/j in favor of deft and against pltf on pltfs claims. Pltf shall take nothing by way of his complt. Through an Order dated 10/24/2012 this Court dimissed w/o prej deft's state law counterclaim against pltf and tolled the statute of limitations. Judgment is entered accordingly. Each party shall bear its own costs. Signed by Judge Larry J. McKinney on 10/24/2012.(CBU)
July 16, 2012	Filing 66 ORDER granting 53 Motion for Summary Judgment and the Pltf shall take nothing by way of his complt. The only issues remaining in the litigation are Visteon's counterclaims, which sound in state law. The Court orders defts to show cause within 30 days of the date of this Order why the Court should not remand its counterclaims to state court. Signed by Judge Larry J. McKinney on 7/16/2012. (CBU)

Date Filed

Document Text

October 24, 2012

Filing 84 CLOSED JUDGMENT-Through orders dated 7/16/2012 and 10/24/2012, the Court granted s/j in favor of deft and against pltf on pltfs claims. Pltf shall take nothing by way of his complt. Through an Order dated 10/24/2012 this Court dimissed w/o prej deft's state law counterclaim against pltf and tolled the statute of limitations. Judgment is entered accordingly. Each party shall bear its own costs. Signed by Judge Larry J. McKinney on 10/24/2012.(CBU)

July 16, 2012

Filing 66 ORDER granting 53 Motion for Summary Judgment and the Pltf shall take nothing by way of his complt. The only issues remaining in the litigation are Visteon's counterclaims, which sound in state law. The Court orders defts to show cause within 30 days of the date of this Order why the Court should not remand its counterclaims to state court. Signed by Judge Larry J. McKinney on 7/16/2012. (CBU)

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 Indiana Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: SHEDLOCK v. VISTEON CORPORATION
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: EDWARD SHEDLOCK
Represented By:	Ronald E. Weldy
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: VISTEON CORPORATION
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?