Principal Life Insurance Company v. Doctors Vision Center I, PLLC et al
| Principal Life Insurance Company |
| Doctors Vision Center I, PLLC and Kenneth B. Grogan |
| Doctors Vision Center I, PLLC |
| Principal Life Insurance Company |
| Kenneth B. Grogan and Doctors Vision Center I, PLLC |
| Doctors Vision Center I, PLLC and Kenneth B. Grogan |
| 5:2012cv00125 |
| August 24, 2012 |
| US District Court for the Western District of Kentucky |
| Paducah Office |
| XX US, Outside State |
| Thomas B. Russell |
| Insurance |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
| 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
87
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER: Principal Lifes Motion for Partial Summary Judgment DN 48 is GRANTED and DVCs Motion for Additional Discovery DN 56 is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Principal Lifes Second Motion for Partial Summary Judgment DN 66 , DVCs Second Motion for Additional Discovery DN 69 , and DVCs Motion to Exclude Expert Witness DN 70 are DENIED as moot. DVCs bad faith claims against Principal Life are DISMISSED with prejudice and DVCs crossclaims against Dr. Grogan are DISMISSED without prejudice. Signed by Chief Judge Joseph H. McKinley, Jr on 12/1/2014. cc: Counsel(JBM)
|
|
Filing
25
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER denying 19 Motion to Dismiss. Signed by Chief Judge Joseph H. McKinley, Jr on 4/15/13. cc:counsel (JBM)
|
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.
