Rodgers v. Mattingly Foods, Inc et al
| James R Rodgers |
| Mattingly Foods, Inc, Andrew Hess, Benjamin Hess, Brandon Hess, Consolidated Storage Solutions, Inc., Mattingly Foods of Louisville, LLC, ABB Leasing Co., 45 Degree Logistics, Inc., John Doe Nos. 1-25 and John Doe Corporation Nos. 1-25 |
| 2:2012cv00713 |
| August 7, 2012 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Ohio |
| Columbus Office |
| MUSKINGUM |
| Elizabeth Preston Deavers |
| Edmund A Sargus |
| Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 |
| 29 U.S.C. ยง 1132 |
| 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
17
OPINION AND ORDER overruling the Defendants' Objections 15 to the Magistrate Judge's 01/11/13 Report and Recommendation. The 01/11/13 Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation 14 is ADOPTED. Plaintiff's Motion to Remand 13 is GRANTED and this case is REMANDED to the Muskingum County Court of Common Pleas. Signed by Judge Edmund A Sargus on 03/28/2013. (dh1)
|
|
Filing
14
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 8 MOTION to Remand: The Magistrate Judge RECOMMENDS that Plaintiff's Motion be GRANTED and that this case be REMANDED to the Muskingum County Court of Common Pleas. Objections to R&R due within fourteen (14) days of the date of this Report. Signed by Magistrate Judge Elizabeth Preston Deavers on 1/11/2013. (er1)
|
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 Southern 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.
