HAMPTON v. SCOTT'S FINISHING TOUCH, INC.

Justia Dockets & Filings Seventh Circuit Indiana Southern District HAMPTON v. SCOTT'S FINISHING TOUCH, INC.

HAMPTON v. SCOTT'S FINISHING TOUCH, INC.

Plaintiff:	VICTORIA L. HAMPTON
Defendant:	SCOTT'S FINISHING TOUCH, INC.
Case Number:	1:2016cv02842
Filed:	October 19, 2016
Court:	US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana
Office:	Indianapolis Office
Presiding Judge:	Denise K. LaRue
Presiding Judge:	Jane Magnus-Stinson
Nature of Suit:	Personal Inj. Prod. Liability
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-(Citizenship)
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
November 13, 2017	Filing 45 ORDER - This matter is before the Court on Defendant Scott's Finishing Touch, Inc.'s ("Scott's") Motion for Summary Judgment. [Filing No. 34 .] Plaintiff Victoria Hampton, proceeding pro se,1 brought this negligence action alleging that Scott's mistakenly used a product called Wheel Magic, which contained lye, to clean the inside of her vehicle. [Filing No. 10 .] Ms. Hampton alleges that her exposure to Wheel Magic caused her permanent respiratory injury. [F iling No. 10 at 4.] Scott's seeks summary judgment on Ms. Hampton's Amended Complaint, arguing that Ms. Hampton failed to file her lawsuit within the applicable statute of limitations. [Filing No. 34 .] For the following reasons, the Court GRANTS Scott's Motion. The Court GRANTS Scott's Motion for Summary Judgment. [Filing No. 34 .] Final Judgment will issue accordingly. (SEE ORDER). Copy to Plaintiff via US Mail. Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 11/13/2017. (APD)

Date Filed

Document Text

November 13, 2017

Filing 45 ORDER - This matter is before the Court on Defendant Scott's Finishing Touch, Inc.'s ("Scott's") Motion for Summary Judgment. [Filing No. 34 .] Plaintiff Victoria Hampton, proceeding pro se,1 brought this negligence action alleging that Scott's mistakenly used a product called Wheel Magic, which contained lye, to clean the inside of her vehicle. [Filing No. 10 .] Ms. Hampton alleges that her exposure to Wheel Magic caused her permanent respiratory injury. [F iling No. 10 at 4.] Scott's seeks summary judgment on Ms. Hampton's Amended Complaint, arguing that Ms. Hampton failed to file her lawsuit within the applicable statute of limitations. [Filing No. 34 .] For the following reasons, the Court GRANTS Scott's Motion. The Court GRANTS Scott's Motion for Summary Judgment. [Filing No. 34 .] Final Judgment will issue accordingly. (SEE ORDER). Copy to Plaintiff via US Mail. Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 11/13/2017. (APD)

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: HAMPTON v. SCOTT'S FINISHING TOUCH, INC.
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: VICTORIA L. HAMPTON
Represented By:	Brad A. Catlin
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: SCOTT'S FINISHING TOUCH, INC.
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?