Nichols et al v. Tillman
| Cherris Nichols and Jamie Nichols |
| Barry Tillman, Jr |
| 5:2011cv00010 |
| February 2, 2011 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi |
| Western Office |
| XX US, Outside State |
| John M. Roper |
| David C. Bramlette |
| Personal Injury- Medical Malpractice |
| 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
143
ORDER granting in part and denying in part 138 Motion with Objections to Defendant's Bill of Costs; denying 141 Defendant's Motion to Amend Bill of Costs Signed by Honorable David C. Bramlette, III on 2/15/2013 (PL)
|
|
Filing
125
ORDER denying 122 Defendant's Motion to Strike and striking certain lines of deposition testimony based on Plaintiffs' objections made during the course of the deposition. Signed by Honorable David C. Bramlette, III on 5/29/12 (PL)
|
|
Filing
121
ORDER granting 110 Motion in Limine; denying 111 Motion in Limine; granting 112 Motion in Limine; granting in part and denying in part 118 Motion for Leave to File Motion in Limine and to Strike Defendant's Out of Time Discovery Responses. Signed by Honorable David C. Bramlette, III on 5/11/2012 (PL)
|
|
Filing
79
ORDER denying 74 Motion to Strike ; denying 76 Motion to Strike ; denying 77 Motion for Hearing Signed by Honorable David C. Bramlette, III on 12/16/2011 (PL)
|
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 Mississippi Southern 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.
