Hernandez et al v. Associated Metal Works, Inc. et al
Jose A. Hernandez and Kim Hernandez |
Associated Metal Works, Inc. and US Metal Works, Inc. |
3:2010cv00544 |
June 1, 2010 |
US District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee |
Nashville Office |
Sumner |
Robert Echols |
Personal Injury- Product Liability |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
Plaintiff |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 46 ORDER: This case is Dismissed with prejudice. Signed by Senior Judge John T. Nixon on 1/4/12. (dt) |
Filing 28 ORDER: Telephone conference was held on 1/25/2011. After discussion with the parties, the initial case management order 25 is amended as follows: Discovery due by 6/17/2011. Dispositive Motions due by 9/19/2011. Signed by Magistrate Judge Joe Brown on 1/26/11. (dt) |
Filing 25 INITIAL CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER: Motion to Amend Pleadings due by 12/3/2010. Discovery due by 6/17/2011. Dispositive Motions due by 7/25/2011. Telephone Conference set for 1/25/2011 at 2:00 PM before Magistrate Judge Joe Brown. Parites shall call (61 5) 695-2851. Jury Trial set for 1/17/2012 at 10:00 AM before Senior Judge Thomas Wiseman. Final Pretrial Conference set for 1/9/2012 at 10:00 AM before Senior Judge Thomas Wiseman. Judge Wiseman will issue a separate order setting forth his requirements for both the trial and pretrial conference. Signed by Magistrate Judge Joe Brown on 8/26/10. (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.