Lapp v. Werner et al
Case Number: 8:2005cv00288
Filed: June 17, 2005
Court: US District Court for the District of Nebraska
Office: 8 Omaha Office
Presiding Judge: David L. Piester
Nature of Suit: Personal Inj. Prod. Liability
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 Petition for Removal- Personal Injury
Jury Demanded By: Both

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
June 8, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 118 ORDER approving 117 Stipulation for Dismissal. The Plaintiff's Complaint is dismissed, with prejudice. Each party is to pay their own taxable costs and attorneys' fees. Ordered by Magistrate Judge David L. Piester. (JAB)
April 24, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 116 ORDER - The court has been advised that the parties in the above-captioned matter have reached a settlement of all their pending claims. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED: (1) Within sixty days of the date of this order the parties shall file a joint stipul ation for dismissal (or other dispositive stipulation) with the clerk of the court together with 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 has been removed from the trial docket upon representation by the parties that the case has settled. Ordered by Magistrate Judge David L. Piester. (LKH)
March 24, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 99 ORDER regarding 98 Motion to Restrict pursuant to the E-Government Act. THIS MATTER comes before the Court on plaintiff's Motion to Restrict Access, filing no. 98 . The Court, being first duly advised in the premises, finds that the plaintiff's motion should be granted. IT IS ORDERED that filing nos. 79-3 through 79-20 shall be removed from the public docket and filed as restricted access documents. Ordered by Magistrate Judge David L. Piester. (LKH)
February 25, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 89 ORDER-Plaintiff's motion to amend complaint, filing no. 76 , is granted. The amended complaint shall be filed forthwith. Ordered by Magistrate Judge David L. Piester. (LKH)
October 20, 2008 Opinion or Order Filing 70 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - Defendant's motion for hearing on plaintiff's objections, filing no. 61 , is granted in part as set out in this Memorandum and Order. Each party shall bear its own expenses with respect to this discovery matter. Ordered by Magistrate Judge David L. Piester. (GJG, )
February 5, 2008 Opinion or Order Filing 37 ORDER - The motion of the law firm of Tribler Orpett & Meyer, withdraw as counsel for defendant Werner Co., filing 34 is granted. Ordered by Magistrate Judge David L. Piester. (GJG, )
June 27, 2005 Opinion or Order Filing 9 ORDER striking Notice of Appearance7 filed by Werner, Notice of Appearance8 filed by Werner. Attorney is directed to submit original filings. Signed by Magistrate Judge David L. Piester on 6/27/2005. (JAR)
June 17, 2005 Opinion or Order Filing 3 GENERAL ORDER 2004-04 - Starting June 1, 2004, Judge Richard Kopf shall be inserted into the Omaha civilcase assignment wheel for approximately 26.3% of cases filed on or after that date in that docket; The Omaha number will remain the case number, and a copy of this order shall be filed in each case assigned to Judge Kopf from the Omaha civil docket; Trial will be held in Omaha, Nebraska, unless otherwise ordered by the Court; Signed by Judge Richard G. Kopf on 5/25/04.(TJS, )
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: Lapp v. Werner 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.

Why Is My Information Online?