Armisted et al v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company
J. B. and Pamela Armisted |
State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company |
2:2007cv10259 |
January 16, 2007 |
US District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan |
Detroit Office |
Oakland |
Donald A Scheer |
Arthur J Tarnow |
State Reapportionment |
No cause code entered |
Plaintiff |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 271 ORDER denying 155 Motion for Default Judgment; denying 162 Sealed Motion and reserving Ruling as to the Appropriate Sanctions; accepting 219 Report and Recommendation ; denying 227 and 234 Plaintiffs' and Defendant's Objections; affirming 216 Magistrate's order; denying 222 Plaintiffs' Objection and denying 202 Plaintiff's Motion to Strike Defendant's Expert Witnesses; finding as moot 224 Motion ; granting 236 Motion to Strike; finding as moot 264 Motion for Leave to File; finding as moot 265 Motion. Signed by District Judge Arthur J Tarnow. (Ware, L.) |
Filing 219 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION re 155 MOTION for Default Judgment as to State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company for Continued and Repeated Intentional Discovery Abuses filed by Pamela Armisted, 162 SEALED MOTION for Default Judgment for Failure to Produce Documents in Violation of Court Order filed by Pamela Armisted. Signed by Magistrate Judge Donald A Scheer. (MLan) |
Filing 198 ORDER denying 165 Motion to Modify Protective Order. Signed by Magistrate Judge Donald A Scheer. (MLan) |
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 Michigan 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.