Christensen v. Norman et al
| Dean H. Christensen |
| Don Roger Norman, Roger William Norman and Cindy Gagliano |
| 2:2017cv01283 |
| December 13, 2017 |
| US District Court for the District of Utah |
| Central Office |
| Salt Lake |
| Dustin B. Pead |
| Other Contract |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
| None |
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
60
ORDER Overruling Objection, Adopting Report and Recommendation, and Dismissing Case: The court adopts 23 Judge Wells' Report and Recommendation in its entirety. Defendant Roger William Norman's Motion to Dismiss 19 and Defendant Harvey Cohen's Motion to Dismiss 39 are GRANTED, and the case is DISMISSED without prejudice. Christensen may refile in Texas State courts in Houston, Harris County, Texas. Having concluded this case was filed in the wrong forum, th e court lacks any basis to resolve the remaining motions pending, and it will defer to the chosen forum to make rulings as appropriate. Accordingly, the remaining motions are denied without prejudice. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case. Signed by Judge Robert J. Shelby on 3/20/19. (dla)
|
|
Filing
35
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: The court ADOPTS Judge Wells' Report and Recommendation and DISMISSES the claims against Don Roger Norman and Cindy Gagliano without prejudice. Signed by Judge Robert J. Shelby on 6/5/18. (dla)
|
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 Utah 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.
