Morcus v. Medi-Copy Services, Inc. et al
Mark Morcus |
Medi-Copy Services, Inc. and Menika Bobo |
5:2017cv00229 |
May 19, 2017 |
US District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky |
Lexington Office |
Fayette |
Danny C. Reeves |
Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1446 |
Plaintiff |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 42 MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER: It is hereby ORDERED as follows: 1. The defendants' 13 Motion for judgment on the pleadings, or in the alternative, for summary judgment is GRANTED in part, and DENIED, in part; 2.Summary judgment is granted in favo r of the defendants with respect to the plaintiff's claim for violation of the Kentucky Consumer Protection Act; 3. The plaintiff's claims for fraudulent misrepresentation, negligent misrepresentation, fraud by omission, interference with contractual relations, intentional and negligent emotional distress, and negligence per se for practice of medicine without a license in violation of Ky. Rev. Stat. § 311.560 are DISMISSED, with prejudice; 4. The defendant's claims for negligence and gross negligence (count 6); negligent hiring, training, supervision, and retention (count 8); and negligence per se for forgery inviolation of 516.040 (count 7) remain pending. Signed by Judge Danny C. Reeves on 11/28/2017.(KM)cc: COR |
Filing 12 MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER: The Show Cause Order 6 entered on 6/2/2017 is SET ASIDE. Signed by Judge Danny C. Reeves on 6/28/2017.(KM)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.