Atad et al v. Atad

Plaintiff: IA and Rosanna Dee Atad
Defendant: Jeffrey Basil Atad
Case Number: 5:2013cv00416
Filed: June 9, 2013
Court: North Carolina Eastern District Court
Office: Western Division Office
County: BEAUFORT
Presiding Judge: James C. Fox
Nature of Suit: Assault Libel & Slander
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Tort/Non-Motor Vehicle
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed#Document Text
January 29, 2015 65 Opinion or Order of the Court JUDGMENT in favor of IA, Rosanna Dee Atad against Jeffrey Basil Atad. Signed by Julie Richards Johnston, Clerk of Court on 1/29/2015. Certified copy sent to Jeffrey Atad via US Mail at 1148 N. Pershing Avenue, Stockton, CA 95203-2144. (Edwards, S.)
January 21, 2015 51 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER granting 44 Motion to Voluntary Dismiss claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress. The jury trial as to damages for the plaintiffs' remaining claims will proceed as scheduled for the court's January 26, 2015 term. The parties are reminded to read the order in its entirety for critical deadlines and information. Signed by Senior Judge James C. Fox on 1/20/2015. Certified copy sent via US Mail to Jeffrey Basil Atad at 1148 N. Pershing Ave., Stockton, CA 95203-2144. (Edwards, S.)
January 12, 2015 41 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER granting 34 Motion for Summary Judgment as to the claims for assault, battery, and false imprisonment. The trial in this matter, currently set for this court's January 26, 2015 term, will be held as to liability and damages for lA' s claim of intentional infliction of emotional distress, as well as the issue of damages for the lA's claims of assault, battery, and false imprisonment. The parties are reminded to read the order in its entirety for further information. Signed by Senior Judge James C. Fox on 1/12/2015. Certified copy of order sent to Jeffrey Basil Atad, 1148 N. Pershing Ave., Stockton, CA 95203-2144 by US Mail on 10/23/2014. (Edwards, S.)
August 26, 2014 26 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER - 21 Motion for Summary Judgment is ALLOWED in part and DENIED in part. It is allowed as to liability on Mrs. Atad's intentional tort claims. It is denied without prejudice to renew as to IA's intentional tort claims. It is denied with prejudice as to the negligence claims and those claims are hereby DISMISSED. Signed by Senior Judge James C. Fox on 8/26/2014. Copy sent to Jeffrey Basil Atad via US Mail. (Grady, B.)

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

Search for this case: Atad et al v. Atad
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Jeffrey Basil Atad
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: IA
Represented By: Jonathan H. Edgar
Represented By: Mark S. Wierman
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: Rosanna Dee Atad
Represented By: Mark S. Wierman
Represented By: Jonathan H. Edgar
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?