Sabric et al v. Lockheed Martin et al
| Andrew Sabric and Genevieve Sabric |
| Lockheed Martin and U.S. Security Associates, Inc. |
| 3:2009cv02237 |
| November 13, 2009 |
| US District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania |
| Scranton Office |
| Lackawanna |
| A. Richard Caputo |
| Defendant |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury |
| Defendant |
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
64
ORDER re 63 Memorandum (Order to follow as separate docket entry), ORDER DISMISSING CASE. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant U.S. Security Associates Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 46) is GRANTED. It is further ORDERED that Defendant Lockheed Martins Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 37) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. (1) Lockheed Martins Motion for Summary Judgment on Plaintiffs claims is GRANTED. (2) Lockheed Martins Motion for Summary Judgment on its cross-claim for indemnification and reimbursement against U.S. Security Associates, Inc. is DENIED. The Clerk of Court is directed to mark the case as CLOSED.Signed by Honorable A. Richard Caputo on 5/30/12. (jam, )
|
|
Filing
31
MEMORANDUM ORDER re 30 Letter. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant U.S. Security Associates, Inc.'s motion for a protective order as to the investigation of Joseph Gill is GRANTED. Signed by Honorable A. Richard Caputo on 5/23/11. (jam, )
|
|
Filing
26
MEMORANDUM ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT within 10 days Defendant submit to the Court Ms. Evan's internal report into the 12/16/08 shooting for in camera review. After any necessary redactions are made by the Court, the Defendant will make the report available to the Plaintiffs. Signed by Honorable A. Richard Caputo on 2/23/11. (jam, )
|
|
Filing
15
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER granting in part and denying in part 5 Motion to Dismiss; denying 11 Motion to Dismiss. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: (1) Defendant Lockheed Martin's Motion For a More Definite Statement, to Dismiss For Failure to State a Claim Upon Which Relief Can Be Granted, and to Strike (Doc. 5) is DENIED in part and GRANTED in part, as follows: a) Defendant Lockheed Martin's Motion to Dismiss is DENIED. b) Defendant Lockheed Martin's Motion for a More Definite Statement is DENIED. c) Defendant Lockheed Martin's Motion to Strike Paragraph 61(e) of the Complaint is GRANTED. (2) Defendant U.S. Security's Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 11) is DENIED. Signed by Honorable A. Richard Caputo on 2/12/10 (jam, )
|
|
Filing
14
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER denying 2 Motion to Remand. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiffs' Motion to Remand (Doc. 2) is DENIED. Signed by Honorable A. Richard Caputo on 2/10/10 (jam, )
|
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 Middle 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.
