Glover v. Hryniewich et al
| David I. Glover |
| Richard J. Hryniewich and The City of Norfolk, Virginia |
| 2:2017cv00109 |
| February 23, 2017 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia |
| Norfolk Office |
| Portsmouth City |
| Robert J. Krask |
| Henry C. Morgan |
| Marine |
| 33 U.S.C. ยง 0901 |
| 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
245
MEMORANDUM OPINION re Third-Party Defendant Willard Marine's 216 Motion to Bifurcate. Signed by District Judge Roderick C. Young on 1/7/22. (bpet, )
|
|
Filing
189
OPINION & ORDER: The Court CONSOLIDATES the cases for all further proceedings. Furthermore, the Court RULES as follows on the remaining motions: (1) GRANTS Hryniewich's Motion for Summary Judgment; (2) DENIES the City's Motion for Summa ry Judgment; (3) DENIES Hryniewich's Motion for Res Judicata as MOOT; (4) RESERVES RULING on SBTs Motion for Summary Judgment; (5) RESERVES RULING on SBTs Motion to Exclude; (6) GRANTS SBTs Motion to Withdraw as Attorney; (7) GRANTS SBTs Motion to Amend / Correct Scheduling Oder to Extend Deadline for De Bene Esse Depositions; (8) RESERVES RULING on Willard's Rule 14 and 19 Motions; (9) GRANTS the City's Motion to Stay. The Case is hereby STAYED until further order of the Court. Signed by District Judge Henry C. Morgan, Jr on 2/7/20. (afar)
|
|
Filing
60
ORDER denying 22 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; denying 24 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings. Signed by District Judge Henry C. Morgan, Jr on 04/16/18. (jjon)
|
|
Filing
13
OPINION & ORDER entered and filed 10/3/17: This matter is before the Court pursuant to Defendant City of Norfolk's ("the City's") and Officer Richard J. Hryniewich's ("Hryniewich's") (collectively, " Defendants'") 5 Motion to Dismiss or Stay ("Motion"). Glover v. Hryniewich. et al., No. 2:17cvl09. Because Glover v. Hryniewich. et al., No. 2:l7cvl09 and Pridemore v. Hryniewich, et al., No. 2:17cvll0 are consolidated for the purposes of discovery and because the actions are identical save for the plaintiffs, the Court will consider the actions as one. For clarity, unless otherwise specified, all references and citations to pleadings will be made to Glover v . Hryniewich. et al., No. 2:l7cvl09. On August 4, 2017, this Court entered an Order GRANTING Defendants' Motion and STAYING this action, pending issuance of the Norfolk Circuit Court's ruling on Defendants' Plea in Bar. Doc. 11 . On August 21, 2017, Defendants filed a Notice of the Circuit Court's ruling. Doc. 12 . In that ruling, the Circuit Court SUSTAINED Defendants' Plea in Bar as to the City, andSUSTAINED IN PART and OVERRULED IN PART Defendan ts' Plea in Bar as to Hryniewich. Id., Ex. A. As to Hryniewich, the Circuit Court held that "under the circumstances, gross negligence is not a proper issue for a plea in bar asserting sovereign immunity." Id, at 2, as outlin ed. For the reasons listed in this Opinion & Order, the Court DENIES Defendants' Motion, Doc. 5. (See Opinion & Order and Foot Note for Specifics) (Signed by District Judge Henry C. Morgan, Jr. on 10/3/17)). Copies provided as directed 10/3/17. (ecav, )
|
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 Virginia Eastern 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.
