Certain Underwriters at Lloyds, London v. Palm Canyon Development, Inc. et al
| Certain Underwriters at Lloyds, London |
| Donna Eng, Wayne Eng and Palm Canyon Development, Inc. |
| 2:2013cv00421 |
| March 13, 2013 |
| US District Court for the District of Nevada |
| Las Vegas Office |
| Peggy A. Leen |
| James C. Mahan |
| Insurance |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Declaratory Judgement |
| None |
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
51
ORDER Granting 45 Defendant's Motion to Abstain. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED. The clerk is instructed to close the case. Signed by Judge James C. Mahan on 04/22/2014. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - AC)
|
|
Filing
41
ORDER Adopting in its entirety 38 Report and Recommendation. FURTHER ORDERED that 29 Palm Canyon's counterclaims are hereby DISMISSED. Signed by Judge James C. Mahan on 2/3/14. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MMM)
|
|
Filing
34
ORDER Granting 32 Motion to Withdraw as to Attorneys Michael T Graves and Charles C. Rainey withdrawn from the case. Defendant Palm Canyon Development, Inc. shall have until 9/12/13, in which to retain new counsel. Clerk of Court shall serve a copy of this Order on Defendants at address noted in this Order. Signed by Magistrate Judge Peggy A. Leen on 8/12/13. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - cc: Palm Canyon Development, Inc. - EDS)
|
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 Nevada 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.
