Baker v. Swift Transportation Co. of Arizona, LLC et al
Plaintiff: Christopher J Baker
Defendant: Swift Transportation Co. of Arizona, LLC and UPS Ground Freight, Inc.
Cross_claimant: UPS Ground Freight, Inc.
Cross_defendant: Swift Transportation Co. of Arizona, LLC
Counter_claimant: UPS Ground Freight, Inc.
Counter_defendant: Christopher J Baker
Case Number: 2:2017cv00909
Filed: October 19, 2017
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Ohio
Office: Columbus Office
County: ADAMS
Presiding Judge: Edmund A. Sargus
Presiding Judge: Chelsey M. Vascura
Nature of Suit: Motor Vehicle
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332
Jury Demanded By: Both

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
May 4, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 25 ORDER granting in part and denying in part 13 Motion to Dismiss. Signed by Chief Judge Edmund A. Sargus on 5/4/2018. (mas)
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 Ohio Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Baker v. Swift Transportation Co. of Arizona, LLC et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Christopher J Baker
Represented By: Nickolas D Owen
Represented By: Scott E Smith
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 [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Swift Transportation Co. of Arizona, LLC
Represented By: Brian J. Pokrywka
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 [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: UPS Ground Freight, Inc.
Represented By: Daniel M Hall
Represented By: Michael James Hickey
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 [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Cross_claimant: UPS Ground Freight, Inc.
Represented By: Daniel M Hall
Represented By: Michael James Hickey
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 [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Cross_defendant: Swift Transportation Co. of Arizona, LLC
Represented By: Brian J. Pokrywka
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 [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Counter_claimant: UPS Ground Freight, Inc.
Represented By: Daniel M Hall
Represented By: Michael James Hickey
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 [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Counter_defendant: Christopher J Baker
Represented By: Nickolas D Owen
Represented By: Scott E Smith
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 [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | 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?