Goral v. Eaton Corporation et al
Plaintiff: Andrea Goral
Defendant: Omron STI Machine Services Inc. and Eaton Corporation
Case Number: 4:2013cv03003
Filed: January 8, 2013
Court: US District Court for the District of Nebraska
Office: 4 Lincoln Office
Presiding Judge: Richard G. Kopf
Presiding Judge: Cheryl R. Zwart
Nature of Suit: Personal Inj. Prod. Liability
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 Petition for Removal- Wrongful Death
Jury Demanded By: Defendant

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
March 10, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 65 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - The Motion to Withdraw Summary Judgment Motion (Filing 64 ) filed by defendant MQ Automation/Mosier Division Indiana is granted. The Motion for Summary Judgment (Filing 61 ) filed by defendant MQ Automation/Mosier Division Indiana is denied as moot without prejudice to refiling. To the extent all parties to this lawsuit have settled this action, the parties should notify the court pursuant to NECivR 41.1. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (GJG)
November 18, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 60 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER regarding 53 Motion to Quash. 1) The motion to quash filed by the Nebraska Department of Health and Human Services, (Filing No. 53 ), is denied.2) On or before December 2, 2013, DHHS shall comply with the subpo ena.3) Absent further order of the court, the information produced pursuant to the subpoena is deemed confidential and subject to the protective order previously entered by the court, (Filing No. 20 ). Ordered by Magistrate Judge Cheryl R. Zwart. (JAB)
July 15, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 31 ORDER - Plaintiff's Third Amended Complaint, (Filing No. 27 ), and Request for Summons, (Filing No. 28 ), are stricken without prejudice to the Plaintiff filing a motion to amend and a proposed amended complaint which includes the information necessary to determine whether diversity jurisdiction will be maintained upon the joinder of MQ Automation, LLC. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Cheryl R. Zwart. (GJG)
March 25, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 20 PROTECTIVE ORDER granting 17 Joint Motion. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Cheryl R. Zwart. (JAB)
January 22, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 9 ORDER regarding Motion for Refund of Filing Fees 8 . Filing Fee in the amount of $350.00 is refunded to the payor, receipt number 0867-2413001. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Cheryl R. Zwart. (JLS, )
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 Nebraska District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Goral v. Eaton Corporation et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Andrea Goral
Represented By: Joel D. Nelson
Represented By: Jefferson Downing
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: Omron STI Machine Services Inc.
Represented By: Jonathan T. Barton
Represented By: Jennifer D. Tricker
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: Eaton Corporation
Represented By: Robert W. Shively, Jr.
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?