Hughs et al v. Union Pacific Railroad Company
Plaintiff: Rhonda Hughs, Randy Groves and T.S.G.
Defendant: Union Pacific Railroad Company
Case Number: 5:2015cv06079
Filed: June 24, 2015
Court: US District Court for the Western District of Missouri
Office: St. Joseph Office
County: Grundy
Presiding Judge: Fernando J. Gaitan
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1346
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
April 28, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 119 ORDER ON REMAINING SUMMARY JUDGMENT HORN ARGUMENTS further granting in part and denying in part 36 motion for partial summary judgment. Signed on 4/28/2017 by District Judge Roseann Ketchmark. (Perry, Madison)
April 27, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 117 ORDER Excluding Active Warning Device Evidence re 115 Plaintiffs Additional Briefing on Evidentiary Issues Regarding Warning Devices, Including Lights and Gates. Signed on 4/27/2017 by District Judge Roseann Ketchmark. (Perry, Madison)
April 14, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 109 ORDER granting in part and denying in part 38 motion for partial summary judgment. The Court finds summary judgment for Defendant on Plaintiffs negligence claims for failure to close the crossing; for failure to properly train, manage, and superv ise its employees; for failure to keep a proper lookout and to slacken speed; the issue of whether the crossing was ultra-hazardous; six of Plaintiffs negligence per se claims; Plaintiffs damages claim for pre-death pain and suffering and pre-impact terror; and Plaintiffs claim for punitive damages. Plaintiffs negligence claims for failure to maintain the crossing withstand Defendants motion for summary judgment. Signed on 4/14/2017 by District Judge Roseann Ketchmark. (Perry, Madison)
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 Missouri Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Hughs et al v. Union Pacific Railroad Company
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Rhonda Hughs
Represented By: Brett A. Emison
Represented By: L. Annette Griggs
Represented By: Robert L. Langdon
Represented By: David Lee McCollum
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Randy Groves
Represented By: Brett A. Emison
Represented By: L. Annette Griggs
Represented By: Robert L. Langdon
Represented By: David Lee McCollum
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: T.S.G.
Represented By: Brett A. Emison
Represented By: L. Annette Griggs
Represented By: Robert L. Langdon
Represented By: David Lee McCollum
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Union Pacific Railroad Company
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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?