Integrity Energy, Ltd. v. Hunter et al
| Integrity Energy, Ltd. |
| Jerran Hunter, Darian Thomas, Amber A. Acoff and I.P.O. Washington Group, LLC |
| 1:2018cv00978 |
| April 30, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Ohio |
| Cleveland Office |
| Cuyahoga |
| Donald C. Nugent |
| Other Statutory Actions |
| 18 U.S.C. ยง 1836 |
| Plaintiff |
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
271
Memorandum Opinion and Order denying Defendants' Motion for Clarification of the Court's 251 Memorandum Opinion and Order (Related Doc # 264 ). Judge Donald C. Nugent on 8/25/2021. (M,S)
|
|
Filing
262
Memorandum Opinion and Order denying 252 Motion for the Appointment of a Receiver; denying 253 Motion to Lift Automatic Stay. IT IS SO ORDERED. Judge Donald C. Nugent on 7/22/2021. (M,S)
|
|
Filing
161
Memorandum Opinion and Order re Discovery Dispute. Judge Donald C. Nugent on 12/9/2020. (M,S)
|
|
Filing
153
Memorandum Opinion and Order granting Defendant's 125 Motion for in Camera Inspection of Documents. The Court finds that an in camera review of the documents at issue is warranted. The Defendants' Reply does not contest Plaintiff& #039;s representation that certain of the requested documents are duplicates of documents they have already received. Therefore, only the documents listed on pages 4 and 5 of the Opposition shall be subject to in camera review. (ECF # 150 ). IT IS SO ORDERED. Judge Donald C. Nugent on 11/16/2020. (M,S)
|
|
Filing
110
Memorandum Opinion and Order. Defendants are hereby instructed to comply with the Court's Order granting Plaintiff's Motions to Compel (Docket #s 59 , 62 and 76 ) and produce all responsive documents to the specific discovery req uests identified in Plaintiff's Motions. This case was settled soon after the Complaint in this case was filed and, based on the arguments raised by the Parties' in briefing and the limited information available to the Court, the question o f whether Defendants breached the settlement agreement may require clarification of the terms and circumstances of the underlying non-compete agreements, along with the nature and breadth of Defendants business activities and the individuals and enti ties involved. The Court reminds the Parties that the only issue before the Court is whether the settlement agreement was breached. While the Parties previously filed a "Stipulated Protective Order" with the Court, Defendants may draft a mo re detailed protective order, requiring the production be limited to an "attorneys eyes only" review, if desired. In their letter, Defendants also asked whether their Motion to Compel Documents from Integrity (Docket #42-1) would be ruled u pon. The Motion is not listed as pending on the Court's Docket and it appears that the Court's ruling on February 19, 2020 was intended to encompass the issues raised therein. Accordingly, the Motion to Compel Documents from Integrity is he reby GRANTED. Integrity is hereby ordered to respond to Defendants' Motion to Compel Information and Documents, subject to any additional provisions regarding the confidentiality or "attorneys eyes only" review that the Parties may desire. IT IS SO ORDERED. Judge Donald C. Nugent on 4/3/2020. re 109 , 108 .(M,S)
|
|
Filing
107
Memorandum Opinion and Order. Plaintiff's Motions to Compel (Docket #s 59 , 62 and 76 ) are hereby GRANTED in their entirety. The Parties shall confer regarding a mutually agreeable protective order, to be filed with the Court. IT IS SO ORDERED. Judge Donald C. Nugent on 3/30/2020. (M,S)
|
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 Ohio Northern 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.
