McIntosh v. Arrow-Med Ambulance, Inc.
| Darrell Stephen McIntosh |
| Arrow-Med Ambulance, Inc., Hershel Jay Arrowood and Lesa Arrowood |
| USA |
| 5:2015cv00105 |
| April 24, 2015 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky |
| Lexington Office |
| Breathitt |
| Robert E. Wier |
| Joseph M. Hood |
| False Claims Act |
| 31 U.S.C. ยง 3729 |
| Defendant |
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
122
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER: 1. Relator's 89 MOTION to Enforce Settlement is GRANTED IN PART to the extent that Relator requests summary enforcement of settlement agreement; 2. Dfts SHALL pay to Relator the sum of $120,000; 3. Dft Arrow- Med Ambulance, Herschel Jay Arrowood, and Lesa Arrowood are liable for the amount awarded to Relator; 4. Parties SHALL submit and agreed payment plan W/IN 21 DAYS; 5. Relator's request for addition atty fees is DENIED IN PART W/OUT PREJUDICE. Relator is directed to quantify fees and costs incurred as a result of Dfts' failure to comply w/ settlement; 6. This is a final and appealable order. Signed by Judge Joseph M. Hood on 4/29/2020.(SLH)cc: COR
|
|
Filing
36
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER: Defendants Arrow-Med Ambulance, Inc., and Hershel Jay Arrowood's 30 Motion for Leave to File a Counterclaim is DENIED. Signed by Judge Joseph M. Hood on 10/27/2016. (STC)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.
