York v. Union Pacific Railroad Company
Plaintiff: Willis Allen York
Defendant: Union Pacific Railroad Company
Case Number: 8:2008cv00507
Filed: November 21, 2008
Court: US District Court for the District of Nebraska
Office: Federal Employer's Liability Office
County: XX US, Outside State
Presiding Judge: F. A. Gossett
Presiding Judge: Lyle E. Strom
Nature of Suit: Both
Cause of Action: Federal Question
Jury Demanded By: 45:51 Railways: Fed. Employer's Liability Act

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
January 15, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 110 MEMORANDUM OPINION - Plaintiff's motion to continue 93 the trial date and amend order setting schedule for progression of a civil case is denied. Defendant's motion for summary judgment 96 is granted. A separate order will be entered in accordance with this memorandum opinion. Ordered by Senior Judge Lyle E. Strom. (JAE)
October 30, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 100 ORDER granting in part and denying in part 84 Motion for Leave to Conduct Supplemental Deposition and for Rule 35 Examinations. Union Pacific's request for leave to conduct a second deposition of plaintiff regarding plaintiff's alleged l eft hip injury is granted to the extent consistent with this order. Union Pacific's request for an order requiring plaintiff to undergo a Rule 35 orthopedic examination by Dr. Mercier is granted to the extent consistent with this order, and plaintiff shall appear for the examination at the date and time to be determined by the parties. Union Pacific's request for a Rule 35 vocational examination by Dr. Greene is denied. Ordered by Senior Judge Lyle E. Strom. (PCV, )
March 5, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 76 ORDER denying 61 motion to change place of trial. Ordered by Senior Judge Lyle E. Strom. (JDR)
January 21, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 73 ORDER - Scheduling Conference set for 2/4/2009 at 01:30 PM before Senior Judge Lyle E. Strom. Ordered by Senior Judge Lyle E. Strom. (CJP)
January 5, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 71 ORDER granting 70 Motion for Leave to withdraw as counsel of record for defendant. Mainess Gibson and Amy Nilsen of Connelly, Baker, Wotring, LLP, are deemed withdrawn as counsel for defendant. Ordered by Senior Judge Lyle E. Strom. (copies mailed) (MKR)
December 12, 2008 Opinion or Order Filing 65 ORDER granting 64 Motion to Withdraw as Attorney. George E. Chandler is deemed withdrawn as counsel for plaintiff. Ordered by Senior Judge Lyle E. Strom. (PCV, )
November 21, 2008 Opinion or Order Filing 6 ORDER - Referring all Pretrial Matters to United States Magistrate Judge Judith Guthrie.Ordered by Judge Thad Heartfield. (PCV, )
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: York v. Union Pacific Railroad Company
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Willis Allen York
Represented By: John G. Zgourides
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: Union Pacific Railroad Company
Represented By: Amy L. Nilsen
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?