C-Ville Fabricating, Inc. et al v. Tarter et al
| C-Ville Fabricating, Inc., Anna Lou Tarter Smith, Luann Coffey and Douglas Tarter |
| Joshua Donald Tarter, Thomas Lewis Gregory and Hong Kong QMC Industry Company, Ltd. |
| 5:2018cv00379 |
| June 5, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky |
| Lexington Office |
| Boyle |
| Karen K. Caldwell |
| Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations |
| 18 U.S.C. ยง 1961 |
| 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
119
OPINION & ORDER:1. Dft's Motion 113 is GRANTED;2. The Court's 3/25/22 Order 106 is REINSTATED.Signed by Judge Karen K. Caldwell on 03/20/2024.(KCF)cc: COR
|
|
Filing
111
ORDER:1. Plaintiffs' motion to alter or amend the Court's March 25, 2022 Opinion & Order 108 is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part;2. Defendant's motion for summary judgement 93 is GRANTED in part & DENIED in part;3. Plaintiff Tar ter Industries' motion for summary judgement 91 is DENIED as moot;4. Plaintiff Tarter Industries may proceed to trial on Counts I (RICO), II(RICO conspiracy), IX (fraudulent misrepresentation), XII (fraudulent concealment/fraud by omission), XIII (usurpation of corporate opportunity), & XIV (unjust enrichment);5. TELEPHONE CONFERENCE set for 3/23/2023 at 03:00 PM in LEXINGTON before Judge Karen K. Caldwell.). Signed by Judge Karen K. Caldwell on 02/22/2023.(KCF)cc: COR,D
|
|
Filing
106
OPINION & ORDER: (1) GRANTING IN PART & DENYING IN PART dft Joshua Donald Tarter and Thomas Lewis Gregorys 93 Motion for Summary Judgment; granting to the extent that it asks the court to hold pla C'Ville Fabricating, Inc. does not have stand ing to assert its claims; granting to the extent that it asksthe Court to hold that plas Anna Lou Tarter Smith, Luann Coffey, and Douglas Tarter do not have derivative standing; the motion is otherwise DENIED AS MOOT; (2) claims brought by pla C' ;Ville Fabricating, Inc. are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE; (3) claims brought by plas Anna Lou Tarter Smith, LuAnn Coffey, and Douglas Tarter in their derivative capacity are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE; (4) DENYING AS MOOT pla's 91 Motion for Partial Summary Judgment. Signed by Judge Karen K. Caldwell on 3/25/22. (KJR)cc: COR
|
|
Filing
65
OPINION & ORDER: 1) Plaintiff's 45 MOTION to Dismiss Counterclaims is GRANTED; and 2) Defendant's 36 MOTION for Joinder is DENIED as moot. Signed by Judge Karen K. Caldwell on 2/20/2020.(JJ)cc: COR
|
|
Filing
31
ORDER AND OPINION: The Court HEREBY ORDERS that Joshua Tarter's 11 MOTION to Dismiss and Thomas Gregory's 12 MOTION to Dismiss are granted in part and denied in part as follows: 1. Dfts Joshua Tarter and Thomas Gregory's motions to dismiss the claims brought in the Plaintiffs' individual capacities are GRANTED. The claims brought by Plaintiffs Anna Lou Tarter Smith, Douglas Tarter, and LuAnn Coffee in their individual capacities are DISMISSED without prejudice; 2. Dfts Joshua Tarter and Thomas Gregory's motions to dismiss the claims brought directly by Tarter Industries are DENIED. Tarter Industries may proceed on its claims against the Defendants; 3. Defendants Joshua Tarter and Thomas Gregory's motions to dismiss claims brought by the Plaintiffs in their derivative capacities are DENIED. Pltfs Anna Lou Tarter Smith, Douglas Tarter, and LuAnn Coffee may proceed on behalf of Tarter Management, Tarter Gate LLC, and Tarter Tube LLC; 4. Dfts Jo shua Tarter and Thomas Gregory's motions to dismiss are GRANTED as to Counts IV, V, VII, and XV. These claims are DISMISSED with prejudice. The rest of the claims may proceed. Tarter Industries, along with Plaintiffs Anna Lou Tarter Smith, Doug las Tarter, and LuAnn Coffey (in their derivative capacities on behalf of Tarter Management, Tarter Gate LLC, and Tarter Tube), may proceed against the Dfts on Counts I, II, III, VI, VIII, IX, X, XI, XII, XIII, and XIV of the Complaint. Signed by Judge Karen K. Caldwell on 3/26/2019.(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.
