Clark v. F.T. Reynolds Co.
Plaintiff: Jack R. Clark
Defendant: F.T. Reynolds Co.
Case Number: 1:2015cv00062
Filed: July 7, 2015
Court: US District Court for the District of Montana
Office: Billings Office
County: RICHLAND
Presiding Judge:
Referring Judge:
Nature of Suit: Other Contract
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on January 15, 2016. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
January 15, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 32 ORDER ADOPTING IN FULL 31 Findings and Recommendations.; DENYING 16 Motion for Summary Judgment; GRANTING 20 Motion for Summary Judgment. COUNT III REMAINS PENDING FOR THE SOLE PURPOSE OF DETERMINING EXPENSES THAT THE DEFENDANT MUST PAY FOR PARKING LOT REPAIRS. Signed by Judge Susan P. Watters on 1/15/2016. (AMC, )

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 Montana District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Clark v. F.T. Reynolds Co.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: F.T. Reynolds Co.
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: Jack R. Clark
Represented By: Casey Heitz
Represented By: Mark D. Parker
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?