Burkesville Hardwoods, LLC v. Coomer et al
| Burkesville Hardwoods, LLC |
| Travis Coomer, Unknown Defendant 1 and Unknown Defendant 2 |
| Travis Coomer |
| Burkesville Hardwoods, LLC |
| 1:2018cv00018 |
| January 29, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Western District of Kentucky |
| Bowling Green Office |
| Adair |
| H. Brent Brennenstuhl |
| Greg N. Stivers |
| Other Contract |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
| Both |
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
76
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Signed by Magistrate Judge H. Brent Brennenstuhl on 12/20/2023. Plaintiff has failed to demonstrate its diligence in attempting to meet the deadline established in the scheduling order for identification of its expert witness, and, as such, Plaintiff's motion to amend the scheduling order, DN 70 , is DENIED. cc: Counsel (DeW)
|
|
Filing
34
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Signed by Chief Judge Greg N. Stivers on 1/17/2020. For the reasons set forth, Plaintiff's Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order or Preliminary Injunction (DN 19 ) is DENIED. Plaintiff's Motion for Su mmary Judgment (DN 21 ) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. Defendant Travis Coomer's counterclaim for tortious interference with the lease is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE, while his counterclaims for misappropriation and tortious interference with contracts between Defendant Travis Coomer and third parties survive. The Court does not void the Lease. cc: Counsel (CDF)
|
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 Western 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.
