Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. et al v. County of Dickson, Tennessee et al
| Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., Beatrice Holt and Sheila Holt-Orsted |
| County of Dickson, Tennessee and City of Dickson, Tennessee |
| 3:2008cv00229 |
| March 4, 2008 |
| US District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee |
| Environmental Matters Office |
| Dickson |
| John S. Bryant |
| William J. Haynes |
| None |
| Federal Question |
| 42:6901 Resource & Recovery Act |
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
451
ORDER: For the reasons set forth in the accompanying Memorandum, the Corporate Defendants' Joint Motion For Summary Judgment 361 is DENIED; the Governmental Defendants' Motion For Summary Judgment 365 is DENIED; and the Plaintiffs' Joint Motion For Partial Summary Judgment is GRANTED in part, and DENIED in part. Plaintiffs' request for summary judgment on the issue of jurisdiction is granted. The Corporate Defendants' Motion For Permission To File Supplemental Memora ndum 449 is GRANTED. Plaintiffs' Motion For Oral Argument 442 is DENIED, as the Court finds oral argument unnecessary. Plaintiffs' Motion To Strike 425 is DENIED, as moot, as the Court finds it unnecessary to consider the testimony o f Mr. Sloan to resolve the pending motions. For purposes of resolving the pending motions, the position of the State of Tennessee is adequately set forth in the testimony of Charles L. Head to which no objection has been raised. The Court expresses no opinion on the admissibility of the testimony of Mr. Sloan or Mr. Head at the trial of this case. Signed by Chief Judge Todd J. Campbell on 1/3/11. (dt)
|
|
Filing
447
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: For the reasons stated in this memorandum, the undersigned Magistrate Judge DENIES plaintiff NRDC's motion for protective order 301 regarding the taking of the Rule 30(b)(6) deposition as moot, and also DENIES as prematur e NRDC's motion for protective order 352 regarding a potential disqualification of Ms. Kyle and waiver of the attorney-client privilege and the work product doctrine. It is so ORDERED. Signed by Magistrate Judge John S. Bryant on 12/20/10. (tmw)
|
|
Filing
254
ORDER: For the reasons set forth in the accompanying Memorandum, the Motion To Dismiss 232 is DENIED. As the Court finds oral argument unnecessary, the Plaintiffs' Motion For Oral Argument 245 is DENIED. It is so ORDERED. Signed by Chief Judge Todd J. Campbell on 4/1/10. (tmw)
|
|
Filing
166
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: Accordingly, the undersigned Magistrate Judge finds as follows: 1. NRDC's motion to enforce order for production of documents is hereby GRANTED. Interstate shall make the subject boxes of documents available to inspection b y NRDC upon two weeks' written notice, and in any event by 9/14/09; 2. Counsel for the parties shall confer and attempt to agree upon the terms of an appropriate protective order to be applied to copies of any Interstate documents deserving prot ection. If the parties are unable to agree on the terms of a protective order, the parties may, by motion, file their competing versions. However, any dispute over the provisions of a protective order shall not delay Interstate's obligation to p roduce the documents for inspection. 3. Interstate's motion for oral argument 146 is DENIED on the ground that oral argument would not benefit the Court, given the multitude and volume of filings by these parties; and 4. NRDC's motion to strike 155 is DENIED. It is so ORDERED. Signed by Magistrate Judge John S. Bryant on 8/13/09. (tmw)
|
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.
