D.A. NOLT, INC. v. LOCAL UNION NO. 30 UNITED UNION ROOFERS, WATERPROOFERS AND ALLIED WORKERS et al
| D.A. NOLT, INC. |
| LOCAL UNION NO. 30 UNITED UNION ROOFERS, WATERPROOFERS AND ALLIED WORKERS, ROOFERS LOCAL NO. 30 COMBINED HEALTH AND WELFARE FUND, ROOFERS LOCAL NO. 30 COMBINED PENSION FUND, ROOFERS LOCAL NO. 30 COMBINED VACATION FUND, ROOFERS LOCAL NO. 30 COMBINED ANNUITY FUND, ROOFERS LOCAL NO. 30 POLITICAL ACTION AND EDUCATION FUND, ROOFING CONTRACTORS ASSOCIATION INDUSTRY FUND, ROOFERS LOCAL NO. 30 APPRENTICESHIP FUND and ROOFERS LOCAL NO. 30 HOME ASSOCIATION FUND |
| 2:2012cv05810 |
| October 11, 2012 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania |
| Philadelphia Office |
| Outside the State of PA. |
| ANITA B. BRODY |
| Other Statutory Actions |
| 29 U.S.C. ยง 185 Employee Pension Plan |
| 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
41
ORDER to MEMORANDUM AND/OR OPINION (ECF NO. 40) that DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (ECF NO. 30) IS GRANTED AND PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (ECF NO. 31) IS DENIED IN PART AND GRANTED IN PART.... IT IS FURTHER ORDERED th at THE PARTIES MEET AND CONFER REGARDING THE CORRECT DOLLAR AMOUNT THAT PLAINTIFF OWES BASED ON THE REVISED TOTAL NUMBER OF HOURS. ON OR BEFORE NOVEMBE 2,2 015, THE PARTIES MUST SUBMIT A PROPOSED REVISED DOLLAR AMOUNT.. SIGNED BY HONORABLE ANITA B. BRODY ON 10/22/2015. 10/22/2015 ENTERED AND COPIES VIA ECF.(mo, )
|
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 Pennsylvania Eastern 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.
