Clevenger et al v. Global Industries et al
| Bobby Clevenger and Susan Clevenger |
| Global Industries and Smithway Motor Xpress |
| 8:2008cv00106 |
| March 11, 2008 |
| US District Court for the District of Nebraska |
| 8 Omaha Office |
| XX US, Outside State |
| Joseph F. Bataillon |
| Thomas D. Thalken |
| P.I.: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury |
| Plaintiff |
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
52
ORDER FOR DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE - IT IS THEREFORE, ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the above-captioned matter is dismissed, with prejudice to a new action, each party to pay their own costs and complete record waived. Ordered by Chief Judge Joseph F. Bataillon. (TCL )
|
|
Filing
48
ORDER - Upon notice of settlement given to the magistrate judge on July 22, 2009, by William E. Gast, counsel for the plaintiffs, the parties shall electronically file a joint stipulation for dismissal on or before August 21, 2009 and shall submit to Joseph F. Bataillon a draft order which will fully dispose of the case. Absent compliance with this order, this case may be dismissed without further notice. The settlement conference and pretrial conference previously scheduled for July 24, 2009, is cancelled upon the representation that this case is settled. ***Set All Deadlines: ( Dismissal Papers Deadline due by 8/21/2009.) Ordered by Magistrate Judge Thomas D. Thalken. (MKR)
|
|
Filing
47
ORDER - Following a discussion with counsel on July 17, 2009, IT IS ORDERED: A settlement conference shall be held before the undersigned with counsel and representatives of the parties on July 24, 2009, at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom No. 7, Second Floor , Roman L. Hruska United States Courthouse, 111 South 18th Plaza, Omaha, Nebraska. A settlement conference statement of each party shall be submitted directly to the undersigned no later than July 22, 2009, setting forth the relevant positions of the parties concerning factual issues, issues of law, damages, and the settlement negotiation history of the case, including a recitation of any specific demands and offers that may have been conveyed. Copies of such settlement conference statements are to be promptly transmitted to all counsel of record. The settlement conference statement may not exceed five (5) pages in length and will not be made a part of the case file. In the event the case does not settle, a final pretrial conference will be held immediately following the conclusion of any settlement negotiations. On or before July 23, 2009, counsel are directed to provide to the undersigned magistrate judge a copy of the final agreed on draft of the proposed final pretrial order. The c opy may be delivered to the undersigned's chambers, e-mailed to the undersigned at thalken@ned.uscourts.gov, faxed to the undersigned's office (402-661-7345), or mailed to the undersigned magistrate judge.Ordered by Magistrate Judge Thomas D. Thalken. (TCL)
|
|
Filing
33
ORDER - The plaintiffs' motion for an enlargement of time and for an amended progression order (Filing No. 32 ) is granted and all future deadlines are suspended pending the planning conference set forth below. The telephone planning conference with the undersigned magistrate judge is rescheduled for December 12, 2008, at 11:00 a.m. Central Standard Time. Plaintiff's counsel shall initiate the telephone conference.Ordered by Magistrate Judge Thomas D. Thalken. (TCL)
|
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.
