Hynes Industries, Inc. et al v. Schletter Inc.
| Hynes Industries, Inc. and American Roll Formed Products Corp. |
| Schletter Inc. |
| 1:2018cv00031 |
| February 9, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Western District of North Carolina |
| Asheville Office |
| XX, Outside State |
| Dennis Howell |
| Max O. Cogburn |
| Other Contract |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
| 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
26
ORDER granting 24 and 25 Motions for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice; attorneys David Peter Fuad and Darren S. Teshima added for Schletter, Inc. Signed by Magistrate Judge Dennis Howell on 2/20/2018. (kby) Modified text on 2/20/2018 (kby).
|
|
Filing
20
ORDER: DENYING without prejudice plaintiffs' 8 MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order. MOTION for Preliminary Injunction CALENDARED for an adversarial hearing on 3/6/2018 at 2:00 PM in Courtroom 2, 100 Otis St, A sheville, NC 28801 before District Judge Max O. Cogburn Jr. Defendant's response to MOTION for Preliminary Injunction due by 2/20/2018 plus an additional 3 days if served by mail and plaintiffs shall have 7 days to file any Reply. If the C ourt grants Preliminary Injunction, parties should be prepared to discuss at hearing the 10 MOTION to Appoint Receiver and 12 MOTION for Prejudgment Attachment. Counsel for plaintiffs are tasked with serving this order as referenced herein. Signed by District Judge Max O. Cogburn, Jr. on 2/13/2018. (maf)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
- 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.
