Scottsdale Ins Co v. Tolliver, et al
Case Number: 4:2004cv00227
Filed: March 19, 2004
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma
Office: Insurance Office
Presiding Judge: Claire V Eagan
Presiding Judge: Frank H McCarthy
Nature of Suit: Defendant
Cause of Action: Diversity
Jury Demanded By: 28:1332 Diversity-Insurance Contract
RSS Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
May 4, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 312 OPINION AND ORDER by Judge Claire V Eagan that Scottsdale is directed to submit proposed writs of execution to the Court Clerk no later than May 8, 2012, and the Court Clerk is ordered to issue the writs of execution as requested by plaintiff in i ts applications (Dkt. ## 257, 258, 274). Defendants are enjoined from interfering with service of the writs or the execution ordered therein. Defendants may not dispose of the LLCs' assets or transfer assets out of the LLCs until Scot tsdale's judgment is satisfied. The Motion of Defendants and MST Properties, LLC to Modify Restraining Order (Dkt. # 310) is moot, as the restraining order has been replaced by the injunction herein. ; granting 257 Motion for Writ of Execution; granting 258 Motion for Writ of Execution; granting 274 Motion for Writ of Execution; accepting 287 Report and Recommendation; accepting 304 Report and Recommendation; finding as moot 310 Motion for Miscellaneous Relief (Re: 243 Judgment,, Awarding Attorney Fees,,, ) (RGG, Chambers)
February 16, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 295 OPINION AND ORDER by Chief Judge Claire V Eagan that the matter is returned to Magistrate Judge Wilson for a supplemental report and recommendation on the issue of insolvency at the time of or as a result of the transfers, referring issue of insolvency to Magistrate Judge Wilson (Re: 287 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION by Magistrate Judge T Lane Wilson ) (RGG, Chambers)
September 29, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 242 OPINION AND ORDER by Chief Judge Claire V Eagan ; awarding attorney fees to Plaintiff and against Defendants ; granting 185 Motion for Attorney Fees; accepting 227 Report and Recommendation; accepting 236 Report and Recommendation (Re: 179 Judgment,, Dismissing/Terminating Case,,,, Entering Judgment, ) (RGG, Chambers)
April 28, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 236 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION by Magistrate Judge Frank H McCarthy (Re: 185 Supplemental MOTION for Attorney Fees and Brief in Support ) (jcm, Dpty Clk)
March 25, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 227 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION by Magistrate Judge Frank H McCarthy PARTIAL REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (Re: 185 Supplemental MOTION for Attorney Fees and Brief in Support ) (jcm, Dpty Clk)
March 2, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 225 OPINION AND ORDER by Chief Judge Claire V Eagan that Plaintiff's Motion to Review Clerk's Action on Motion for Costs and Brief in Support (Dkt. # 217) is granted, and the Court Clerk's order denying Scottsdale's supplement al motion and bill of costs (Dkt. # 213) is vacated. Scottsdale's supplemental motion for costs (Dkt. # 186) and supplemental bill of costs (Dkt. # 191) are remanded to the Court Clerk. ; vacating/setting aside order(s); rein stating document(s); granting 217 Motion for Miscellaneous Relief (Re: 213 Minute Order, Ruling on Motion for Costs, 186 Supplemental MOTION for Costs, 191 Bill of Costs ) (Documents Terminated: 213 Minute Order, Ruling on Motion for Costs ) (RGG, Chambers)
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 Oklahoma Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Scottsdale Ins Co v. Tolliver, et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | 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?