Turner v. Aetna Life Insurance Company

Justia Dockets & Filings Ninth Circuit Nevada District Court Turner v. Aetna Life Insurance Company

Turner v. Aetna Life Insurance Company

Plaintiff:	Montgomery Turner
Defendant:	Aetna Life Insurance Company
Case Number:	3:2017cv00388
Filed:	June 21, 2017
Court:	US District Court for the District of Nevada
Office:	Reno Office
Presiding Judge:	William G. Cobb
Presiding Judge:	Larry R. Hicks
Nature of Suit:	Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 1132 E.R.I.S.A.
Jury Demanded By:	None

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed	Document Text
February 24, 2018	Filing 34 ORDER granting ECF No. 33 Stipulation of Dismissal with prejudice. Signed by Judge Larry R. Hicks on 2/24/2018. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - LH)
October 6, 2017	Filing 18 PROTECTIVE ORDER re 17 Joint Motion for Protective Order. Paragraph 9 - Challenge to Designation: Any motion regarding filing confidential information and motions to seal shall comply with LR 1A 10-5 and the dictates of Kamakana v. City and County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172 (9th Cir. 2006). See also, Center for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Group, LLC, 809 F.3d 1092, 1097 (9th Cir. 2016). Paragraph 11 - Jurisdiction to Enforce Protective Order: The Protective Order is modified t o reflect that although the parties may agree to be bound by the confidentiality terms of this Order beyond the conclusion of this lawsuit, the dismissal of this action will terminate the jurisdiction of this Court. Signed by Magistrate Judge William G. Cobb on 10/6/2017. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - HJ)

Date Filed

Document Text

February 24, 2018

Filing 34 ORDER granting ECF No. 33 Stipulation of Dismissal with prejudice. Signed by Judge Larry R. Hicks on 2/24/2018. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - LH)

October 6, 2017

Filing 18 PROTECTIVE ORDER re 17 Joint Motion for Protective Order. Paragraph 9 - Challenge to Designation: Any motion regarding filing confidential information and motions to seal shall comply with LR 1A 10-5 and the dictates of Kamakana v. City and County of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172 (9th Cir. 2006). See also, Center for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Group, LLC, 809 F.3d 1092, 1097 (9th Cir. 2016). Paragraph 11 - Jurisdiction to Enforce Protective Order: The Protective Order is modified t o reflect that although the parties may agree to be bound by the confidentiality terms of this Order beyond the conclusion of this lawsuit, the dismissal of this action will terminate the jurisdiction of this Court. Signed by Magistrate Judge William G. Cobb on 10/6/2017. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - HJ)

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 Nevada District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Turner v. Aetna Life Insurance Company
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Defendant: Aetna Life Insurance Company
Represented By:	Kaempfer Crowell
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 ]
Plaintiff: Montgomery Turner
Represented By:	Vernon E. Leverty
Represented By:	Patrick R. Leverty
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?