Strope v. UNUM Provident Corp. et al
| 1:2006cv00628 |
| September 15, 2006 |
| US District Court for the Western District of New York |
| Buffalo Office |
| John T. Curtin |
| Labor: E.R.I.S.A. |
| 29 U.S.C. ยง 1132 E.R.I.S.A.-Employee Benefits |
| 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
47
DECISION AND ORDER denying Plaintiff's 41 MOTION to Alter Judgment. Plaintiff's Motion for Attorney's Fees is granted. Plaintiff is entitled to an award of costs and fees in the amount of $33,395.00. Signed by Hon. John T. Curtin on 11/3/2010. (JEC)
|
|
Filing
39
DECISION AND ORDER denying Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment and granting in part Plaintiff's Cross Motion for Summary Judgment. The determination is vacated, and the case is remanded for reconsideration consistent with this Decision and Order. Signed by Hon. John T. Curtin on 3/23/2010. (JEC)
|
|
Filing
36
MEMORANDUM AND OPINION denying Plaintiff's 32 MOTION for Discovery. Plaintiff shall file a response to the motion by 4/17/2009. A reply may be filed, if desired, by 5/11/2009. The court will then consider the motion submitted or set a date for oral argument. Signed by Hon. John T. Curtin on 3/4/2009. (JEC)
|
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 Western 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: Strope v. UNUM Provident 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.
