Olvera et al v. Norfolk Southern Railway Company
Case Number: 1:2006cv03597
Filed: December 22, 2006
Court: US District Court for the District of South Carolina
Office: Aiken Office
Presiding Judge: Margaret B Seymour
Nature of Suit: P.I.: Other
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
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
June 27, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 378 ORDER granting 365 Motion for Attorney Fees. The court imposes attorneys' fees against Douglas M. Schmidt, individually, in the amount of $8,016.40. Signed by Chief Judge Margaret B Seymour on 6/27/2012.(asni, )
January 21, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 364 ORDER granting 354 Motion for Order to Show Cause; granting 354 Motion for Permanent Injunction; granting 354 Motion for Preliminary Injunction as to Maleah Busbee as well as defendants request for costs and attorneys fees related to the filing and prosecuting of the motion. Defendant shall file a motion and affidavit supporting its fee request within 14 days of the date of this Order. Signed by Chief Judge Margaret B Seymour on 1/21/2012.(asni, )
June 21, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 344 JUDGMENT in favor of Norfolk Southern Railway Company against Plaintiff's counsel, individually, for attorney's fees in the sum of $17,639.82. (asni, )
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 South Carolina District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Olvera et al v. Norfolk Southern Railway Company
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?