INDIANA STATE COUNCIL OF CARPENTERS FUND v. SCHENKEL AND SONS INC et al
Plaintiff: MARK MCGRIFF and WILLIAM NIX
Defendant: SCHENKEL AND SONS INC and SCHENKEL CONSTRUCTION INC.
Case Number: 1:2014cv01742
Filed: October 24, 2014
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana
Office: Indianapolis Office
Presiding Judge: Mark J. Dinsmore
Presiding Judge: Tanya Walton Pratt
Nature of Suit: Labor: E.R.I.S.A.
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1132 E.R.I.S.A.
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
February 23, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 46 ENTRY ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS AND REQUEST FOR ATTORNEYS' FEES - The case and controversy between the Fund and Schenkel was fully resolved by the arbitrator's decision, thereby mooting this litigation and depriving this Court of jurisdiction. Therefore, the Court GRANTS Schenkel's Motion to Dismiss and Request for Attorneys' Fees (Filing No. 42 ). For the reasons explained in the arbitrator's decision, see Filing No. 43-1 at 20-22, the Court declines to award Schenkel its attorney fees, as requested in its Motion to Dismiss. Final judgment will issue under separate order. (See Entry.) Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 2/23/2017. (JLS)
March 13, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 40 ORDER granting in part and denying in part Defendants' 33 Motion to Stay this lawsuit pending the outcome of the arbitration. The court STAYS adjudication of Construction's potential joint liability with Sons for interim withdrawal payments. The Fund may, if desired, seek relief from the court against Sons with respect to interim withdrawal payments. Signed by Magistrate Judge Debra McVicker Lynch on 3/13/2015. (BGT)
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: INDIANA STATE COUNCIL OF CARPENTERS FUND v. SCHENKEL AND SONS INC et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: MARK MCGRIFF
Represented By: Paul T. Berkowitz
Represented By: Alexander B. Handelsman
Represented By: Sarah A. Huck
Represented By: Thomas Edward Moss
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 ]
Plaintiff: WILLIAM NIX
Represented By: Paul T. Berkowitz
Represented By: Alexander B. Handelsman
Represented By: Sarah A. Huck
Represented By: Thomas Edward Moss
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: SCHENKEL AND SONS INC
Represented By: Adam L. Bartrom
Represented By: William T. Hopkins, 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 ]
Defendant: SCHENKEL CONSTRUCTION INC.
Represented By: Adam L. Bartrom
Represented By: William T. Hopkins, 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?