Anthony California, Inc. v. Moran et al
| Anthony California, Inc. |
| Direct Lighting, L.L.C., M&M Sales, Inc. and James Moran |
| 8:2017cv00112 |
| April 3, 2017 |
| US District Court for the District of Nebraska |
| 8 Omaha Office |
| John M. Gerrard |
| Cheryl R. Zwart |
| Contract: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1330 Breach of Contract |
| 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
63
PROGRESSION ORDER (AMENDED) - The parties' Second Joint Motion to Modify Progression Order (Filing No. 62 ) is granted. The jury trial of this case is set to commence before John M. Gerrard, Chief United States District Judge, in Courtroom 1, U nited States Courthouse, Lincoln, Nebraska, a 9:00 a.m. on June 1, 2020, or as soon thereafter as the case may be called, for a duration of seven (7) trial days. The Pretrial Conference is scheduled to be held before the undersigned magistrate judge on May 19, 2020 at 10:00 a.m., and will be conducted by internet/telephonic conferencing. Counsel shall use the conferencing instructions assigned to this case to participate in the conference. A telephonic conference to discuss the status of case pr ogression and the parties' interest in settlement will be held with the undersigned magistrate judge on January 14, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. by telephone. Counsel shall use the conferencing instructions assigned to this case to participate in the conference. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Cheryl R. Zwart. (KLF)
|
|
Filing
58
ORDER granting 57 Joint Motion to Amend Order Setting Schedule for Progression of a Civil Case. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Cheryl R. Zwart. (JLA)
|
|
Filing
53
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - Plaintiff's motion for issuance of a third-party subpoena, (Filing No. 39 ), is granted in part and denied in part: a. Topics 6, 7, 11 & 12 will be limited to the years 2014 to 2016. b. Documents will be produced as " ;Attorneys' Eyes Only" and in accordance with case protective order until the parties are able to review and challenge those designations as needed. Plaintiff's motion for leave to file a reply brief, (Filing No. 49 ), is denied. Defendant's objection to Plaintiff's motion for leave, (Filing No. 50 ), is granted. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Cheryl R. Zwart. (KLF)
|
|
Filing
29
ORDER - On or before May 16, 2018, Plaintiff shall file any motion, if any, challenging Defendants' objections to the Plaintiff's proposed subpoena for service on Raymour and Flanigan; and Defendants shall file any motion, if any, to includ e an Attorney Eyes Only provision in the parties' protective order for this litigation. A response to any motion filed under this paragraph shall be filed on or before May 25, 2018. No reply shall be filed absent leave of the court for good caus e shown. The parties' joint motion to modify, (Filing No. 27 ), is granted in part. The current case progression deadlines, including the trial and pretrial conferences settings, are vacated pending further order of the court. Note: Discovery i s not stayed - only the deadlines for completing it are vacated. A telephonic conference with the undersigned magistrate judge will be held on August 21, 2018 at 9:00 a.m. to discuss the outcome of the parties' ongoing effort to specifically ide ntify which lamps sold by Raymour and Flanigan are actually at issue in this case and their discovery related to those lamps. Counsel shall use the conferencing instructions assigned to this case, (see Filing No. 19 ), to participate in the call. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Cheryl R. Zwart. (KLF)
|
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.
