IMS Health Incorporated et al v. Sorrell
| 1:2007cv00188 |
| August 29, 2007 |
| US District Court for the District of Vermont |
| Brattleboro Office |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1981 Civil Rights |
| 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
481
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER granting in part and denying in part 465 , 474 Motions for Attorney Fees, Expenses and Costs. Signed by District Judge J. Garvan Murtha on 7/17/2012. (wjf)
|
|
Filing
443
RULING ON 433 Motion for Permanent Injunction: The Court finds Plaintiffs have not satisfied the requirements for an injunction pending appeal under Fed. R. Civ. P. 62(c). Plaintiffs' 433 Motion for Injunction Pending Appeal is DENIED. Signed by Judge J. Garvan Murtha on 6/5/2009. (kak)
|
|
Filing
430
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: Plaintiffs 6 , 61 motions for declaratory and injunctive relief as well as 168 summary judgment are DENIED. Defendants 205 , 247 and 257 motions for summary judgment are DENIED as moot. Defendants 290 Motion in Limine Seeking Judicial Notice of Certain Documents Pursuant to the Doctrine of Legislative Facts is DENIED as moot. Signed by Judge J. Garvan Murtha on 4/23/2009. (kak)
|
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 Vermont 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
| Search for this case: IMS Health Incorporated et al v. Sorrell | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | 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.
