Watson-Tobah v. Royal Moving & Storage Inc. et al
| Nikki Watson-Tobah |
| Royal Moving & Storage Inc. and Louis Da-Silva |
| 1:2013cv07483 |
| October 23, 2013 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| Bronx |
| Katherine B. Forrest |
| Motor Vehicle |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 |
| 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
125
OPINION & ORDER re: 98 FIRST MOTION for Extension of Time To File Expert Rebuttal Report. filed by Nikki Watson-Tobah, 109 MOTION in Limine to Preclude Plaintiff's Treating Doctor's from Testifying at Trial. fi led by Royal Moving & Storage Inc., Louis Da-Silva, 100 MOTION in Limine to Preclude the Admission of the Plaintiff's Medical Records. filed by Royal Moving & Storage Inc., Louis Da-Silva, 94 MOTION in Limine to Pre clude the Testimony of Plaintiff's Expert Dr. Pamela McCauley. filed by Royal Moving & Storage Inc., Louis Da-Silva, 104 MOTION in Limine to Preclude the Plaintiff From Testifying Regarding Statements made by Her Doctors. fi led by Royal Moving & Storage Inc., Louis Da-Silva. For the reasons set forth above, defendants' motion for summary judgment is GRANTED. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate the motions at ECF Nos. 94, 98, 100, 104, and 109 as moot and to terminate this action. (Signed by Judge Katherine B. Forrest on 12/5/2014) (lmb)
|
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 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.
