Estate of Kim Ha Ram et al v. Ride the Ducks of Seattle, LLC et al
| Estate of Kim Ha Ram, Kim Soon Wan and Jeong Ju Hee |
| Ride the Ducks of Seattle, LLC and Ride the Ducks International, LLC |
| 2:2015cv01929 |
| December 8, 2015 |
| US District Court for the Western District of Washington |
| Seattle Office |
| XX Outside US |
| Thomas S. Zilly |
| Motor Vehicle Product Liability |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1391 |
| Both |
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
68
MINUTE ORDER granting plaintiffs' 66 Unopposed Motion to Dismiss; This action is DISMISSED without prejudice and without costs, authorized by Judge Thomas S. Zilly. (SWT)
|
|
Filing
65
MINUTE ORDER denying 64 Stipulated Motion to remand by Judge Thomas S. Zilly.(RS)
|
|
Filing
63
STIPULATION AND ORDER granting parties' 62 Stipulated Motion to Substitute Attorney, signed by Judge Thomas S. Zilly. (SWT) (Added attorney Karen Kathryn Koehler, Andrew N. Ackley for plaintiffs. Attorney David L. Broom and William C Schroeder terminated.)
|
|
Filing
51
ORDER by Judge Thomas S. Zilly. The court STRIKES the hearing set for 10/27/2016. Defendant Ride the Ducks of Seattle, LLC's Rule 12(c) motion for partial judgment on the pleadings, docket no. 26 , as joined by Ride the Ducks International, LLC, docket no. 29 , is GRANTED, and the claims against both Ride the Ducks/Seattle and RTDI under Washington law for wrongful death, non-pecuniary damages in connection with the "survival" action, and outrage (intentional infliction of emotional distress) are DISMISSED with prejudice. (AD)
|
|
Filing
35
ORDER by Judge Thomas S. Zilly. Pursuant to Rule 5.1(b) and 28 U.S.C. § 2403, the Court hereby certifies to the Washington State Attorney General that a constitutional challenge to a state statute has been presented in this case. The Attorney General may intervene in this matter within 60 days after the notice is filed or after the Court certifies the challenge, whichever is earlier. Pursuant to Rule 5.1(c), the Court may reject the constitutional challenge before the time to intervene expires. (AD) cc: WA State Attorney General
|
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 Washington Western 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.
