Fleet Systems, Inc. v. Federal Coach
Fleet Systems, Inc. |
Federal Coach |
Federal Coach |
Fleet Systems, Inc. |
8:2007cv00008 |
January 4, 2007 |
US District Court for the District of Nebraska |
8 Omaha Office |
Dodge |
Joseph F. Bataillon |
Thomas D. Thalken |
Contract: Recovery/Enforcement |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 Petition for Removal |
Plaintiff |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 19 TEMPORARY INJUNCTION regarding Memorandum and Order18; IT IS ORDERED: Federal Coach is hereby enjoined from terminating, cancelling, or altering the terms of the parties' Agreement dated November 24, 1992; Federal Coach shall continue the cust oms, practices and course of dealing that it applied to the 2006 Agreement; it shall apply a deal discount to all sales of Federal Coach vehicles to Fleet Systems, Inc. in an amount comparable to that applied to invoices governed by the 2006 contract and no sales specific territorial marketing assessments shall be applied to Fleet's sales; pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P.65(c), Fleet Systems, Inc. shall furnish a bond in the amount of $31,500.00. Ordered by Judge Joseph F. Bataillon. (PCV, ) |
Filing 8 ORDER - temporary restraining order (attachment to 1) remains in effect until further order of this court; hearing on TRO scheduled for 1/8/2007 09:30 AM in Courtroom 3 (Omaha) before Chief Judge Joseph F. Bataillon.Ordered by Judge Joseph F. Bataillon. (SMS, ) |
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.