Young v. Boston Scientific Corporation et al
| James Young |
| Boston Scientific Corporation and Abbott Laboratories |
| 2:2008cv00028 |
| March 26, 2008 |
| US District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee |
| Personal Inj. Prod. Liability Office |
| Putnam |
| John S. Bryant |
| Robert Echols |
| Defendant |
| Diversity |
| 28:1441 Notice of Removal- Personal Injury |
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
28
ORDER: Accordingly, (1) the R&R of the Magistrate Judge 26 is hereby ACCEPTED; (2) Defts' Motion for Summary Judgment 12 is hereby GRANTED; (3) Deft Abbott Laboratories' Motion to Dismiss 23 is hereby DENIED AS MOOT; (4) This case is hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; and (5) Entry of this Order on the docket shall constitute entry of final judgment in accordance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 58 and 79(a). Signed by Senior Judge Robert Echols on 1/14/09. (tmw)
|
|
Filing
26
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: Magistrate Judge Bryant Recommends that defendants' MOTION for Summary Judgment 12 be Granted and that the complaint be Dismissed with prejudice. Alternatively, Magistrate Judge Bryant Recommends that defendants' MOTION to Dismiss 23 be Granted and the complaint be Dismissed without prejudice. Signed by Magistrate Judge John S. Bryant on 12/4/08. (cc: pltf by reg. & cert. mail) (dt) Modified Text on 12/4/2008 (dt).
|
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 Tennessee 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.
