Gonzalez v. Auto Zone Inc et al
| Pete Gonzalez |
| Auto Zone Inc, Steve Beussink, Aztex Advantage, Sedgwick Claims Management Services Inc, UNUM Life Insurance Company of America and Justin Emerson |
| 4:2009cv04054 |
| December 18, 2009 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Texas |
| Houston Office |
| Harris |
| Nancy F. Atlas |
| Plaintiff |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury |
| Plaintiff |
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
181
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER DENIED 163 Opposed MOTION to Alter Judgment, 165 MOTION to Alter Judgment, 164 Opposed MOTION for Leave to File Motion for Leave (Signed by Judge Nancy F. Atlas) Parties notified.(sashabranner, )
|
|
Filing
158
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER (Signed by Judge Nancy F. Atlas) Parties notified.(sashabranner, )
|
|
Filing
114
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Defendants Motion to Dismiss [Docs. # 89, # 92] is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. Count III is DISMISSED by agreement. It is furtherORDERED that Defendants Motion to Compel Arbitration [Doc. # 91] of Counts V and VI is GRA NTED. It is further( Dispositive Motion Filing due by 8/5/2011., Joint Pretrial Order due by 10/7/2011., Docket Call set for 10/13/2011 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 9F before Judge Nancy F. Atlas).(Signed by Judge Nancy F. Atlas) Parties notified.(sashabranner, )
|
|
Filing
81
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER.ORDERED that the previous Memorandum and Order [Doc. # 80] is VACATED and SUPERSEDED by this Amended Memorandum and Order. It is furtherORDERED that Defendants Motion to Dismiss [Docs. # 54, # 57] is GRANTED in part and DENIED i n part as discussed herein. Plaintiffs breach of contract claim is DISMISSED as preempted by ERISA. It is furtherORDERED that on or before March 14, 2011, Plaintiff must file a Fourth Amended Complaint. The Fourth Amended Complaint must set forth separately for each ERISA claim the name of each Defendant against which the claim is asserted, the supporting facts, the precise statutory and regulatory basis, and the relief requested. The Fourth Amended Complaint also must set forth separately f or each tort claim the name of each Defendant, the acts that Defendant allegedly committed, and the precise legal doctrine on which the claim is based. Failure of Plaintiff to meet these requirements may result in dismissal of Plaintiffs claims. It is furtherORDERED that Defendants Motion to Compel Arbitration [Docs. # 56, # 59] is DENIED without prejudice. It is furtherORDERED that Defendants Motion for Leave to File Motion for Protection from Discovery [Doc. # 64] and Defendants Motion for Protective Order [Doc. # 65] are DENIED without prejudice in accordance with the oral rulings at the discovery conference on March 7, 2011. (Signed by Judge Nancy F. Atlas) Parties notified.(sashabranner, )
|
|
Filing
39
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER.Defendants Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. # 20] is GRANTED as to Plaintiffs Complaint. It is further ORDERED the Plaintiffs Motion for Continuance under Rule 56(f) [Doc. # 33] is DENIED.(Signed by Judge Nancy F. Atlas) Parties notified.(sashabranner, )
|
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 Texas Southern 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.
