North Carolina Wildlife Federation et al v. NCDOT et al
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|Date Filed||#||Document Text|
|October 24, 2011
ORDER denying 47 Motion for Summary Judgment by plaintiffs North Carolina Wildlife Federation, Clean Air Carolina, and Yadkin Riverkeeper; granting 50 Motion for Summary Judgment by defendants Federal Highway Administration and John F. Sullivan; and, granting 52 Motion for Summary Judgment by defendants North Carolina Department of Transportation and Eugene Conti. Signed by Chief Judge James C. Dever III on 10/24/2011. (Richards, J.)
|February 25, 2011
ORDER granting 35 Joint Motion for Briefing and Hearing Schedule. Counsel should read the Order in its entirety for all critical deadlines. Signed by District Judge James C. Dever III on 2/25/2011. (Sawyer, D.)
|December 30, 2010
ORDER: Plaintiffs have failed to meet the heavy burden necessary to obtain a preliminary injunction. Thus, plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction is DENIED without prejudice [D.E. 8]. Plaintiffs' motion to strike is DENIED [D.E. 25 ]. Defendants shall complete and serve the administrative record not later than January 31, 2011. The court will hold a status conference in this case on Friday, February 4,2011, at 10:00 a.m. in Raleigh. Counsel should be prepared to discuss scheduling and discovery issues at the status conference. The court intends to move this case expeditiously to a decision on the merits on a full record. Signed by Judge James C. Dever III on 12/30/2010. (Sawyer, D.)
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 North Carolina Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
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?