Lidle et al v. Cirrus Design Corporation

Plaintiff: Melanie Lidle, Christopher Lidle, Stephanie Stanger, Ashlund Stanger, Jordan Feagan and Thayne Stanger
Defendant: Cirrus Design Corporation
Case Number: 1:2008cv01253
Filed: February 7, 2008
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of New York
Office: Foley Square Office
County: XX Out of State
Presiding Judge: Barbara S. Jones
Presiding Judge: Henry B. Pitman
Nature of Suit: Airplane Product Liability
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Notice of Removal
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
November 7, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 510 OPINION AND ORDER denying for all of the foregoing reasons 495 FIRST MOTION for New Trial filed by Stephanie Stanger, Melanie Lidle, Thayne Stanger, Ashlund Stanger, Jordan Feagan, Christopher Lidle. (Signed by Judge Barbara S. Jones on 11/7/2011) (cd)
November 18, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 232 OPINION AND ORDER, for all the reasons set forth, plaintiffs' 97 motion to reopen discovery is denied in all respects. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Henry B. Pitman on 11/18/2010) Copies Sent By Chambers. (lnl)
October 29, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 228 Opinion and Order, that defendant's request for certification is DENIED. (Signed by Judge Barbara S. Jones on 10/28/2010) (lnl)
July 6, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 209 OPINION AND ORDER re: 70 MOTION to Strike. filed by Cirrus Design Corporation, 66 MOTION to Strike. filed by Cirrus Design Corporation, 62 MOTION to Strike. filed by Cirrus Design Corporation, 74 MOTION to Strike. filed by Cirrus Design Corpo ration, 82 MOTION for Summary Judgment. filed by Cirrus Design Corporation, 78 MOTION to Strike. filed by Cirrus Design Corporation. For the reasons set forth above, Defendant's Motion to Strike the Expert Opinions of Hughes, Kumar, Leffe, Lind, and Llorente are Denied and Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED (Signed by Judge Barbara S. Jones on 7/6/10) (djc)
April 22, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 120 OPINION AND ORDER: Accordingly, for all the foregoing reasons, plaintiffs' application is granted with regard to references to and quotations from reports prepared by the NTSB itself and denied with regard to any references to or quotations from the factual reports of investigators. Cirrus is to submit revised briefs that delete the stricken material within ten (10) days of the date of this Order. ( The disputes resolved by this Order have been raised in a series of letters rather than by formal motion.) SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Henry B. Pitman on 4/22/2010) Copies Mailed By Chambers.(tve)
December 18, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 59 ORDER granting 49 Motion to Strike the supplemental or rebuttal report of plaintiffs' expert, Peter Leffe, and to deny plaintiffs leave to serve the report is granted.. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Henry B. Pitman on 12/18/09) Copies sent by chambers(cd)
March 24, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 38 ORDER: All documents withheld by Feagan are ordered produced on the ground that plaintiffs have not offered any evidence sufficient to establish any element of either the attorney-client privilege or work-product doctrine with respect to any document listed on Feagan's schedule of withheld documents, as set forth herein. Unless production is stayed by myself or Judge Jones, plaintiffs are directed to produce the documents listed on Feagan's schedule of withheld documents within twenty (20) days of the date of this Order. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Henry B. Pitman on 3/23/2009) Copies Mailed By Chambers.(jpo)

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: Lidle et al v. Cirrus Design Corporation
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Melanie Lidle
Represented By: Todd Macaluso
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Christopher Lidle
Represented By: Todd Macaluso
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Stephanie Stanger
Represented By: Todd Macaluso
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Ashlund Stanger
Represented By: Todd Macaluso
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Jordan Feagan
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Thayne Stanger
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Cirrus Design Corporation
Represented By: Patrick E. Bradley
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 [ 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?