Central Telephone Company of Virginia et al v. Sprint Communications Company of Virginia, Inc. et al
| Central Telephone Company of Virginia, United Telephone Southeast, LLC, Embarq Florida, Inc., United Telephone Company of Indiana, Inc., United Telephone Company of Kansas, United Telephone Company of Eastern Kansas, United Telephone Company of Southcentral Kansas, Embarq Missouri, Inc., Embarq Minnesota, Inc., United Telephone Company of the West, Central Telephone Company, United Telephone Company of New Jersey, Inc., Carolina Telephone and Telegraph Company, LLC, United Telephone of Ohio, United Telephone Company of the Northwest, The United Telephone Company of Pennsylvania, LLC, United Telephone Company of the Carolinas LLC, United Telephone Company of Texas, Inc. and Central Telephone Company of Texas |
| Sprint Communications Company of Virginia, Inc. and Sprint Communications Company LP |
| 3:2009cv00720 |
| November 16, 2009 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia |
| Richmond Office |
| Richmond |
| Robert E. Payne |
| Plaintiff |
| 47 U.S.C. ยง 0332 Telecommuncations Act of 1996 |
| 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
218
MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by District Judge Robert E. Payne on 12/13/11. (jtho, )
|
|
Filing
216
MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by District Judge Robert E. Payne on 12/12/11. (jtho, )
|
|
Filing
185
MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by District Judge Robert E. Payne on 3/30/2011. (lhin, )
|
|
Filing
180
MEMORANDUM OPINION. For the reasons set forth, judgment will be entered for the Plaintiffs for compensatory damages and late charges in stipulated amounts or pursuant to decision based on briefs to be filed as required by the Order entered on February 18, 2011(see order for details). Signed by District Judge Robert E. Payne on 3/1/2011. (lhin, )
|
|
Filing
169
Memorandum Opinion: Centurylink's Objections to the Magistrate's Report and Recommendation (Docket No. 43) are sustained and the defendants' Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction and Failure to Exhaust Administrative Remedies, or Alternatively, to Stay this Case under the Doctrine of Primary Jurisdiction (Docket No. 9) is DENIED; and the Motion for Leave to Supplement the Appendix to Centurylink's Opposition to Sprint's Motion to Dismiss or Stay (Docket No. 20) is DENIED. Signed by District Judge Robert E. Payne on 1/3/2011. (lhin)
|
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.
