Harris v. Jiangsu ASG Earth Environmental Protection Science and Technology Co., Ltd. et al
Kenneth Matthew Harris |
Jiangsu ASG Earth Environmental Protection Science and Technology Co., Ltd., JAS Forwarding (USA), Inc. and China Container Line Ltd. |
Liberty Mutual Group |
3:2013cv00044 |
July 23, 2013 |
US District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky |
Frankfort Office |
Franklin |
Gregory F. Van Tatenhove |
P.I.: Other |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 Petition for Removal- Personal Injury |
Both |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 81 MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER: that Plaintiff Harris's motion for default judgment [R. 75] is GRANTED. Harris shall be awarded $127,066.57 in past medical expenses; $250,000.00 in future medical expenses; $513,000.00 for loss of future wages; and $2,000,000.00 for pain and suffering. Judgment against Jiangsu ASG in the amount of $2,890,066.57 shall be entered contemporaneously herewith. Signed by Judge Gregory F. VanTatenhove on 7/13/2017.(AKR)cc: COR |
Filing 28 MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER: 1. China Container's Motion for Summary Judgment [R. 14] is DENIED without PREJUDICE with leave to refile; 2. China Containers' Motion to Strike Docket Entry 21 [R. 22] is GRANTED; and, 3. The Plaintiff SHALL, within seven (7) days of the filing of this Order, provide the Court with an updated status report as to the service of Jiangsu. Signed by Judge Gregory F. VanTatenhove on 9/18/2014.(AKR)cc: COR |
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 Kentucky Eastern 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.