Dixon v. Greyhound Lines, Inc. et al
| Edward D Dixon |
| Greyhound Lines, Inc., GLI Corporate Risk Solutions and FirstGroup America |
| 3:2013cv00179 |
| March 19, 2013 |
| US District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana |
| Baton Rouge Office |
| James J. Brady |
| Richard L. Bourgeois |
| P.I.: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 Notice of Removal |
| 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
78
RULING AND ORDER granting in part 51 Motion for Sanctions as it relates to an award of fees and expenses and DENIED as to any other award of sanctions. Plaintiff's counsel shall pay to Defendant $777.40 to be paid within 14 days of this Order. Signed by Magistrate Judge Richard L. Bourgeois, Jr on 12/22/2014. (LLH)
|
|
Filing
76
RULING AND ORDER denying 48 Motion to Compel and granting in part and denying in part 49 Motion to Extend Discovery Deadlines. The 49 Motion to Extend is GRANTED in part to the extent Plaintiff seeks a modification of the Daubert motion deadline only. The parties have until 7 days following the deposition of Dr. Warner to file any Daubert motions. Signed by Magistrate Judge Richard L. Bourgeois, Jr on 11/19/2014. (LLH)
|
|
Filing
71
ORDER denying 43 Motion for Sanctions for Spoliation of Evidence. Signed by Magistrate Judge Richard L. Bourgeois, Jr on 11/13/2014. (LLH)
|
|
Filing
52
ORDER: The 51 Motion to Quash and request for expedited consideration is hereby GRANTED. Any request for documents and any deposition notice that goes beyond the deposition of Mr. Smith will not be permitted. The deposition of Mr. Smith may proceed on 10/3/2014 as scheduled.The motion also requests that sanctions be ordered against plaintiff. To the extent that sanctions may be appropriate or permissible under Rule 26 and/or Rule 37 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, imposition of sanc tions requires an opportunity to be heard. Defendants are ORDERED to file an affidavit of reasonable expenses incurred in bringing this Motion, including attorneys fees setting forth time and hourly rate, no later than 10/6/2014. Plaintiff's shall file a response, if desired, not later than 10/10/2014, regarding the imposition of sanctions, including whether the plaintiffs position was substantially justified or the imposition of sanctions would be unjust. Plaintiffs response may also address whether Defendants affidavit of expenses is reasonable. Signed by Magistrate Judge Richard L. Bourgeois, Jr on 10/2/2014. (LLH)
|
|
Filing
46
RULING AND ORDER granting in part and denying in part 38 Motion for Summary Judgment. Defendants Motion for Summary Judgment as to Plaintiffs claims that Defendants were negligent by violating Greyhounds corporate policies and by failing to evacuate the bus is DENIED; Plaintiffs remaining claims of negligence against all Defendants are DISMISSED; Plaintiffs claims against GLI Corporate Risk Solutions are hereby DISMISSED; and Defendants' request for costs and attorney fees' is hereby DENIED. Signed by Judge John W. deGravelles on 09/16/2014. (CGP)
|
|
Filing
23
ORDER granting 21 Motion to Compel Discovery Responses and Physical Medical Examination. Signed by Magistrate Judge Richard L. Bourgeois, Jr on 01/06/2014. (NLT)
|
|
Filing
13
RULING Adopting 12 Report and Recommendations of the U.S. Magistrate Judge as the court's opinion herein. Because all of the named defendants are diverse from plaintiff, the plaintiff's 4 Motion to Remand is DENIED. Signed by Judge James J. Brady on 09/03/2013. (CGP)
|
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 Louisiana Middle 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.
