Smith v. Oreck et al
Plaintiff: Paul David Smith
Defendant: Vecteur Direct, Diane Johnson and Oreck
Case Number: 2:2011cv00093
Filed: September 2, 2011
Court: US District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee
Office: Cookeville Office
County: Putnam
Presiding Judge: John S. Bryant
Presiding Judge: Kevin H. Sharp
Nature of Suit: Employment
Cause of Action: 29 U.S.C. ยง 2601
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
July 11, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 34 ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS: The Court has thoroughly reviewed the record in this case and the applicable law and concludes that the Magistrate Judge was correct in recommending that the unopposed Motion to Dismiss for Failure to Prosecute filed on behalf of Defendants (Docket Entry No. 23) be granted. Signed by District Judge Kevin H. Sharp on 7/11/12. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(afs)
June 26, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 30 ORDER: The Court has thoroughly reviewed the record in this case and the applicable law and concludes that the Magistrate Judge was correct in recommending that the unopposed Motion to Dismiss for Failure to Prosecute filed on behalf of Defendants (D ocket Entry No. 23) be granted. Accordingly, the Court hereby rules as follows: (1) The Report and Recommendation (Docket Entry No. 27) is hereby ACCEPTED and APPROVED; (2) Defendants' Motion to Dismiss for Failure to Prosecute (Docket Entry No . 23) is hereby GRANTED; (3) Plaintiffs claims are hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; (4) Defendants' Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings (Docket Entry No. 12) is hereby DENIED AS MOOT; and (5) Defendants' Motion to Ascertain Status of Defe ndants' Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings is hereby DENIED AS MOOT (Docket Entry No. 22). Entry of this Order on the docket shall constitute entry of a final judgment in accordance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 58 and 79(a). It is SO ORDERED. Signed by District Judge Kevin H. Sharp on 6/26/12. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(afs)
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 Tennessee Middle District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Smith v. Oreck et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Vecteur Direct
Represented By: Shana G. Fonnesbeck
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Diane Johnson
Represented By: Shana G. Fonnesbeck
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Oreck
Represented By: Shana G. Fonnesbeck
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Paul David Smith
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | 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?