Sun Belle v. Farmers Premium Produce, et al.
4:2005cv03048 |
February 24, 2005 |
US District Court for the District of Nebraska |
4 Lincoln Office |
Richard G. Kopf |
David L. Piester |
Agriculture Acts |
07 U.S.C. ยง 499 Agricultural Commodities Act |
None |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 24 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER that the plaintiff's "stipulation to reopen case and enter judgment" (filing 22), treated as a motion, is granted in part and denied in part, as follows: a. This case is reopened; and b. In all other respects the motion is denied. Within thirty (30) days from today's date the plaintiff shall either: a. Submit a proposed judgment, approved as to form and content byall parties, that will fully dispose of this case; or b. Submit a proposed judgment and fil e an application supported by affidavit(s) establishing the plaintiff's entitlement to entry of the proposed judgment. Defendants shall be allowed ten (10) days to respond to any such application. 3. Absent compliance with paragraph 2 above, this case may be dismissed without further notice. Signed by Judge Richard G. Kopf on 8/24/2005. (CS, ) |
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 Nebraska 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
Search for this case: Sun Belle v. Farmers Premium Produce, et al. | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | 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.