Maxwell v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
5:2005cv00817 |
June 30, 2005 |
US District Court for the Northern District of New York |
Syracuse Office |
Gustave J. DiBianco |
Gary L. Sharpe |
Insurance |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Insurance Contract |
None |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 70 JUDGMENT DISMISSING ACTION BY REASON OF SETTLEMENT: This action is hereby dismissed in its entirety without prejudice pursuant to Local Rule 68.2(a). The parties may request reinstatement of this case within 60 days if the settlement is not consummated, otherwise the dismissal will become with prejudice thereafter. The # 69 Letter Request/Motion is terminated as moot. Signed by Judge Glenn T. Suddaby on 1/25/2010. (jmb) |
Filing 63 MEMORANDUM DECISION & ORDER denying Defendant's # 39 Motion for Summary Judgment; and denying as moot Plaintiff's # 53 Motion to Strike the testimony of Dr. Richard M. Fiese, DMD from the administrative record. Counsel are directed to contact Judge Suddaby's courtroom deputy by 9/15/09 to schedule a prompt bench trial in this matter. Signed by Judge Glenn T. Suddaby on 9/1/09. (lmw) |
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 New York Northern 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
Search for this case: Maxwell v. Metropolitan 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 ] |
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.