Pelman, et al v. McDonald's Corp., et al

Justia Dockets & Filings Second Circuit New York Southern District Pelman, et al v. McDonald's Corp., et al

Pelman, et al v. McDonald's Corp., et al

Case Number:	1:2002cv07821
Filed:	September 30, 2002
Court:	US District Court for the Southern District of New York
Office:	Foley Square Office
Presiding Judge:	Robert W. Sweet
Nature of Suit:	Personal Inj. Prod. Liability
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal
Jury Demanded By:	Plaintiff

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
October 27, 2010	Filing 160 OPINION AND ORDER: Plaintiffs' motion for class certification and, in the alternative, for issue class certification, is DENIED in its entirety. The parties shall consult and submit a revised scheduling order by November 29, 2010. (Signed by Judge Donald C. Pogue on 10/27/10) (mro)
March 27, 2009	Filing 136 ORDER: In order to ensure that the docket sheet appropriately reflects the actual work before the Court, the Court now directs the Clerk to close Defendant's motion to strike (D.E. 102). The Court assures the parties that in resolving the remain ing motion, Plaintiffs' motion to certify the class, the Court will consider, as appropriate, all papers, arguments, and evidence submitted on this issue, whether originally submitted as part of Defendant's motion to strike the class allegations, or as part of Plaintiffs' cross motion to certify the class. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Kimba M. Wood on 3/27/2009) (tve)

Date Filed

Document Text

October 27, 2010

Filing 160 OPINION AND ORDER: Plaintiffs' motion for class certification and, in the alternative, for issue class certification, is DENIED in its entirety. The parties shall consult and submit a revised scheduling order by November 29, 2010. (Signed by Judge Donald C. Pogue on 10/27/10) (mro)

March 27, 2009

Filing 136 ORDER: In order to ensure that the docket sheet appropriately reflects the actual work before the Court, the Court now directs the Clerk to close Defendant's motion to strike (D.E. 102). The Court assures the parties that in resolving the remain ing motion, Plaintiffs' motion to certify the class, the Court will consider, as appropriate, all papers, arguments, and evidence submitted on this issue, whether originally submitted as part of Defendant's motion to strike the class allegations, or as part of Plaintiffs' cross motion to certify the class. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Kimba M. Wood on 3/27/2009) (tve)

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 New York Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Pelman, et al v. McDonald's Corp., et al
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.

Why Is My Information Online?