Rezac Livestock Commission Co., Inc. v. Pinnacle Bank et al
| Rezac Livestock Commission Co., Inc. |
| Dinsdale Bros., Inc. |
| Dinsdale Bros., Inc. |
| Rezac Livestock Commission Co., Inc. |
| 5:2015cv04958 |
| November 3, 2015 |
| US District Court for the District of Kansas |
| Topeka Office |
| Pottawatomie |
| Daniel D. Crabtree |
| K. Gary Sebelius |
| Other Contract |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 |
| 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
225
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER. IT IS ORDERED BY THE COURT THAT plaintiff's unjust enrichment claims will be tried to the court. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT plaintiff waived its quantum meruit claim. See Order for details. Signed by District Judge Daniel D. Crabtree on 01/09/2020. (mig)
|
|
Filing
222
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER denying 215 defendant Pinnacle Bank's Motion to Reconsider or, in the Alternative, Judgment on the Pleadings and 217 defendant Dinsdale Bros., Inc.'s Motion to Reconsider Summary Judgment on Civil Conspiracy Claim and for Judgment on the Pleadings for Civil Conspiracy Claim. Signed by District Judge Daniel D. Crabtree on 01/03/2020. (mig)
|
|
Filing
214
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER granting in part and denying in part 170 defendant Dinsdale's Motion in Limine to Exclude Evidence of Direct Payment Measure; denying 172 defendant Dinsdale's Motion in Limine to Exclude Evidence of Unrelated Deali ngs; granting 175 plaintiff's Motion in Limine to Exclude Testimony of John Barthel; granting 176 plaintiff's Motion in Limine to Exclude Evidence Regarding Collateral Source Payment by Other Rezac Entities; granting in part and denying in part 178 defendant Pinnacle's Motion in Limine. Signed by District Judge Daniel D. Crabtree on 12/23/19. (ctv)
|
|
Filing
157
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER granting 127 Motion for Reconsideration. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT the portion of the court's December 21, 2018, Memorandum and Order (Doc. 125) denying Pinnacle Bank's Motion for Summary Judgment against plaintiff Rezac Livestock Commission Co., Inc.'s conversion claim is vacated. Signed by District Judge Daniel D. Crabtree on 6/26/19. (hw)
|
|
Filing
125
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER granting in part and denying in part 102 Defendant Dinsdale Bros., Inc.'s Motion for Summary Judgment; denying 104 Defendant Pinnacle Bank's Motion for Summary Judgment and denying 110 Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed by District Judge Daniel D. Crabtree on 12/21/2018. (mig)
|
|
Filing
67
PROTECTIVE ORDER. The parties shall abide by the terms of the order. Signed by Magistrate Judge K. Gary Sebelius on 9/1/2017.(wh)
|
|
Filing
55
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER denying 48 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim. Signed by District Judge Daniel D. Crabtree on 06/06/2017. (mig)
|
|
Filing
44
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER denying 31 Plaintiff's Motion to alter or amend the part of its August 26 ruling where the court dismissed plaintiff's conversion claim against Pinnacle Bank. The court grants 31 Motion for Leave to Amend Complain t. The court also grants plaintiff's motion for leave to file its proposed Second Amended Complaint. Plaintiff must file this Complaint within 14 days from the date of this Order. Defendants Dinsdale Brothers, Inc. and Pinnacle Bank must file any response to the Second Amended Complaint within 21 days from the date plaintiff serves them with it. Signed by District Judge Daniel D. Crabtree on 1/10/2017. (ms)
|
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 Kansas 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.
