RICHARD v. TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATION et al
| JOYCE RICHARD |
| TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATION, TOYOTA MOTOR ENGINEERING AND MANUFACTURING NORTH AMERICA, INC. and TOYOTA MOTOR SALES USA, INC. |
| 1:2015cv01931 |
| December 8, 2015 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana |
| Indianapolis Office |
| Tim A. Baker |
| Jane Magnus-Stinson |
| Motor Vehicle Prod. Liability |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Motor Vehicle Product Liability |
| Plaintiff |
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
40
ORDER. Ms. Richard has not presented any evidence that Toyota's counsel has violated the Indiana Rules of Professional Conduct, any Indiana rules relating to the admission and discipline of attorneys, HIPAA, or any other law. Accordingly, bec ause no ethical violations have occurred, the Court need not consider whether disqualification or disbarment are appropriate remedies. Toyota's counsel has not engaged in any wrongdoing, and Ms. Richard's Motion to Disqualify Toyota's counsel is DENIED. Filing No. 33. (See order.) Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 5/3/2016. Copy sent to Plaintiff via U.S. Mail. (BGT)
|
|
Filing
31
ENTRY Concerning Selected Matters. The plaintiff's motion for the Court's assistance in serving Toyota Motor Corporation ("TMC") with service of process [dkt. 12] is granted. The plaintiff's motion to file waiver of service of summons [dkt. 13] is denied as moot. The plaintiff's motion for the Court to hold personal jurisdiction over TMC [dkt.20]is denied as premature. The plaintiff's motion for an extension to time to file a reply to the defendants' answers [dkt. 21] is denied as unnecessary. The plaintiff's motions for clerk's entry of default [dkt. 23] and for default judgment [dkt. 24] against TMC are denied. TMC's motion to dismiss for insufficient service of process [dkt. 25] is denied. Although TMC is entitled to 60 days to file the waiver form, counsel for TMC is directed to notify the court in writing, within 14 days of the date this Entry is issued, whether service is expected to be waived so that the Court ca n plan accordingly. If service is not waived, the court will be required to expend judicial resources to effect proper service, an expense which could ultimately be charged to TMC consistent with Rule 4. TMC's assistance in this regard would be appreciated. Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 2/23/2016. Copy sent to Plaintiff via U.S. Mail. (BGT)
|
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 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.
