Ramalingam v. Robert Packer Hospital/Guthrie Healthcare System Auxiliary et al
Plaintiff: |
Saravanan Ramalingam, M.D. |
Defendant: |
Robert Packer Hospital/Guthrie Healthcare System Auxiliary, Robert Packer Hospital, Thomas Vandermeer, M.D. and Burt Cagir, M.D. |
Case Number: |
4:2017cv00216 |
Filed: |
February 5, 2017 |
Court: |
US District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania |
Office: |
Williamsport Office |
County: |
Bradford |
Presiding Judge: |
Matthew W. Brann |
Nature of Suit: |
Other Contract |
Cause of Action: |
28 U.S.C. § 1332 |
Jury Demanded By: |
Plaintiff |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Date Filed |
Document Text |
October 13, 2021 |
Filing
125
ORDER (memorandum filed previously as separate docket entry) - IT ISHEREBY ORDERED that: Defendants' 87 Motion in Limine to Dismiss Punitive Damages Under the Cause of Action for Tortious Interference with Contractual/Business Relations is DE NIED. Defendants' 89 Motion in Limine to Limit the Plaintiffs Damages Under the Remaining Causes of Actions and Prevent the Plaintiff from Presenting Evidence of Damages is DENIED. Defendants' 91 Motion in Limine to Preclude the Plainti ff from Presenting Evidence of Economic Loss is DENIED. Defendants' 93 Motion in Limine to Dismiss the Plaintiff's Complaint Based on Failure of the Plaintiff to Produce Expert Testimony to Meet the Plaintiff's Burden Under the Health Care Quality Improvement Act is DENIED. Signed by Chief Judge Matthew W. Brann on 10/13/2021. (jr)
|
August 21, 2019 |
Filing
57
ORDER (memorandum filed previously as separate docket entry) - IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant's 44 Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED IIN PART and DENIED in PART as follows: The motion is GRANTED with respect to Counts I and IV of Plaintiff's Complaint. The motion is also GRANTED with respect to Plaintiff's effort to obtain punitive damages as part of his promissory estoppel claim. The motion is otherwise DENIED. Signed by Honorable Matthew W. Brann on 8/21/2019. (jr)
|
December 4, 2017 |
Filing
22
ORDER denying 15 Motion to Dismiss. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(a)(4)(A), Defendants shall file an answer to Plaintiff's Complaint, ECF No. 1, within 14 days of the date of this Order. Signed by Honorable Matthew W. Brann on 12/4/2017. (jn)
|
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 Pennsylvania Middle District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
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?