Quasius v. Schwan Food Company, The et al
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|Date Filed||#||Document Text|
|August 13, 2010
ORDER : IT IS ORDERED THAT:1.Defendants Amended Motion for Attorney Fees [Docket No. 53] is DENIED. 2.Defendants Motion for Review of Costs Judgment [Docket No. 69] is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.3.The Cost Judgment [Docket No. 68] is AMENDED to tax an additional $1,468.71 in transcript fees for Quasiuss deposition for a total of $1,902.76.4.The Clerk of Court is directed to enter an Amended Cost Judgment in accordance with this Order.(Written Opinion) Signed by Judge Joan N. Ericksen on August 13, 2010. (slf)
|January 15, 2009
ORDER. Quasius's motion under Rules 59(e) and 60(b) is DENIED (Written Opinion). Signed by Judge Joan N. Ericksen on January 15, 2009. (slf)
|December 23, 2008
ORDER re 28 Letter to District Judge filed by Schwan's Global Supply Chain, Inc, Schwan Food Company, The (Written Opinion). IT IS ORDERED THAT:1.Defendants request for summary judgment dismissing Quasiuss ADA claims [Docket No. 28] is GRANTED.2.Quasiuss Complaint [Docket No. 1] is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY.Signed by Judge Joan N. Ericksen on December 23, 2008. (slf)
|November 14, 2008
ORDER granting in part and denying in part 9 Motion to Dismiss. IT IS ORDERED THAT:1.Defendants motion for partial summary judgment and for sanctions [Docket No. 9] is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.2.The deadline for Quasius to bring a motion to withdraw or amend his responses to Defendants requests for admissions is December 14, 2008. 3.Counts I-II of Quasiuss Complaint [Docket No. 1] are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE to the extent they are based on discrete acts occurring before September 17, 2005.4.Counts III-V of Quasiuss Complaint [Docket No. 1] are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.(Written Opinion). Signed by Judge Joan N. Ericksen on November 14, 2008. (slf)
Access additional case information on PACER
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 Minnesota District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
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.
Why Is My Information Online?