Culp v. Archer-Daniels-Midlands Company et al
| Jeffrey D. Culp |
| Archer-Daniels-Midland Company and Jacobs Field Services North America, Inc. |
| 4:2008cv03197 |
| September 19, 2008 |
| US District Court for the District of Nebraska |
| Torts to Land Office |
| Platte |
| Richard G. Kopf |
| David L. Piester |
| Plaintiff |
| Diversity |
| 28:1332 Diversity-Personal Injury |
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
153
SETTLEMENT ORDER. It is ordered that: (1)By July 19, 2010, the parties shall file a joint stipulation for dismissal (or other dispositive stipulation) with the clerk of the court (and provide a copy to the magistrate judge and to United States Distr ict Judge Richard G. Kopf, the trial judge to whom this case is assigned), together with submitting to the trial judge a draft order which will fully dispose of the case;(2)Absent compliance with this order, this case (including all counterclaims and the like) may be dismissed without further notice;(3)This case is removed from the court's trial docket upon representation by the parties that the case has settled. ***Set Dismissal Papers Deadline -- due by 7/19/2010. Termed 11/10/2010 Pretrial Conference and 11/29/2010 trial date. Ordered by Judge Richard G. Kopf. (KLL, )
|
|
Filing
125
ORDER granting 122 Stipulation. The cross-claim filed herein by Archer against Fagen (filing 93 ) and the cross-claim filed herein by Fagen against Archer (filing 108 ) are dismissed without prejudice. With regard to these cross-claims, each party shall pay its own costs. The other claims filed by parties in this action remain pending. Ordered by Judge Richard G. Kopf. (JAB)
|
|
Filing
114
ORDER. (1)The following matter previously scheduled before the undersigned is herewith referred to Judge Zwart, to wit,(A)Nature of hearing:Pretrial conference.(B)Date and time of hearing: Wednesday, November 10, 2010, at 10:00 a.m.(C)Place of hearin g: Judge Zwart's chambers, Room 566, United States Courthouse and Federal Building, 100 Centennial Mall, North, Lincoln, Nebraska.(2)Judge Zwart will issue a report and recommendation or order as is appropriate. Ordered by Judge Richard G. Kopf. (KLL, )
|
|
Filing
92
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - The plaintiffs motion to withdraw, (filing no. 91 ), is granted, and the plaintiff's Motion to Strike the Motion for Leave to File Cross Claims, (filing no. 87 ), is denied as moot. Defendant Archer-Daniels-Midland Compa ny's motion to file an Amended Answer to Second Amended Complaint and Cross Claims, (filing no. 81 ), is granted. On or before November 20, 2009, defendant Archer-Daniels-Midland Company shall file its Amended Answer to Second Amended Complaint and Cross Claims, a copy of which is attached to its motion. Ordered by Judge Richard G. Kopf. (JAB)
|
|
Filing
90
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - The motion to withdraw as counsel for defendant, Jacobs Field Services North America, Inc. ("Jacobs"), (filing no. 86 ), filed by Stephen G. Olson, II and the law firm of Engles, Ketcham, Olson & Keith, P.C, is grant ed. Attorney Tim B. Streff remains counsel of record for defendant Jacobs. The plaintiff has moved to strike Archer-Daniels-Midland Company's ("ADM") motion to file a cross-claim against Jacobs because the law firm of Engles, Ketcham, Olson & Keith, P.C. represented both ADM and Jacobs in this case. Filing No. 87 . On or before November 10, 2009, counsel for the plaintiff shall file a statement clarifying whether its objection, (filing no. 87 ), is withdrawn or moot in light of the withdrawal of Stephen G. Olson, II and the law firm of Engles, Ketcham, Olson & Keith, P.C, as counsel for Jacobs. Ordered by Judge Richard G. Kopf. (GJG)
|
|
Filing
64
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - The plaintiff's unopposed motion for leave to file a second amended complaint, (filing no. 63 ), is granted. The plaintiff's second amended complaint, a copy of which is attached to the plaintiff's motion, shal l be filed on or before September 18, 2009, and the plaintiff shall promptly effectuate service on the new defendant, Stainless Fabrication, Inc. On or before October 29, 2009, the parties shall jointly file a motion setting forth their proposed dea dlines for continued progression of this case to trial, including deadlines for serving mandatory disclosures, disclosing experts and their reports, and for completion of discovery, along with a statement of when the case will be ready for trial. Ordered by Judge Richard G. Kopf. (JAB)
|
|
Filing
62
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - 1) The plaintiff's anticipated motion to file an amended complaint to add a defendant shall be filed on or before September 8, 2009. 2) The parties' joint oral motion to continue the August 28, 2009 deadline for filin g their joint motion for a scheduling order, (see filing no. 54 ), is granted. Once the anticipated new defendant has responded to the plaintiff's complaint, a new deadline will be set by order of the court. Ordered by Judge Richard G. Kopf. (JAB)
|
|
Filing
54
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: The plaintiff's unopposed motion to amend the scheduling order 52 is granted. On or before 8/28/09 the parties shall jointly file a motion setting forth their proposed deadlines for continued progression of this case to t rial, including deadlines for serving mandatory disclosures, disclosing experts and their reports, and for completion of discovery, along with a statement of when the case will be ready for trial. The planning conference scheduled before Magistrate J udge Piester on 9/29/09 is cancelled. Counsel for the plaintiff shall promptly forward a copy of this order to counsel for Stainless Fabrication, Inc. and shall file a certificate in the court's record stating he has done so as order by Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Case Management Deadline set for 8/28/2009.) (SED)
|
|
Filing
49
ORDER regarding 48 Motion for Leave. IT IS ORDERED: 1) The plaintiff's unopposed motion for leave to file an amended complaint, (Filing No. 48 ), is granted. 2) The plaintiff's amended complaint, a copy of which is attached to his motion, shall be filed on or before June 29, 2009. Ordered by Judge Richard G. Kopf. (LKH)
|
|
Filing
40
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER-This matter is before the court on Defendant Archer-Daniels-Midlands Company's (ADM) motion for summary judgment (filing 18 ). The question before the court is whether ADM is considered Plaintiff's statutory employer u nder Neb. Rev. Stat § 48-116 of the Nebraska Workers Compensation Act. See Neb. Rev. Stat § 48-101, et seq.. For the reasons set forth below, the court concludes that ADM is not Plaintiff's statutory employer. IT IS ORDERED that ADM's motion for summary judgment (filing 18 ) is denied. Ordered by Judge Richard G. Kopf. (LKH)
|
|
Filing
31
ORDER - Defendant Archer-Daniels-Midlands Company's motion (filings 27 , 29 ) requesting additional time in which to reply to Plaintiff's Brief in Opposition to Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (filing 25 ) is granted; Defendant Archer-Daniels-Midlands Company shall file its responsive brief and any evidentiary materials on or before February 6, 2009. Ordered by Judge Richard G. Kopf. (JAB)
|
|
Filing
22
ORDER regarding 21 Unopposed MOTION to Extend time to respond to MOTION for Summary Judgment 18 . IT IS ORDERED: Plaintiff's motion (filing 21 ) requesting additional time in which to respond to Archer-Daniels-Midlands Company's motion for summary judgment (filing 18 ) is granted; Plaintiff shall file his responsive brief and any evidentiary materials on or before January 27, 2009. Ordered by Judge Richard G. Kopf. (LKH)
|
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
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.
