The Hanover Insurance Company v. Mehling et al
| The Hanover Insurance Company |
| Cristina Mehling, John Doe Mehling, Mehling Law Firm PLLC and Virginia L Burdette |
| 2:2016cv01671 |
| October 26, 2016 |
| US District Court for the Western District of Washington |
| Seattle Office |
| King |
| Thomas S. Zilly |
| Insurance |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
| Defendant |
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
65
ORDER denying Mehling Defendants' 44 Motion for Attorney Fees; striking as moot Hanover's 64 Motion to Strike Supplemental Reply and Supporting Declarations; striking as moot Hanover's 15 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; dismissing Hanover's remaining claims with prejudice and without costs, signed by Judge Thomas S. Zilly. (SWT)(cc: Gordon Tilden Thomas & Cordell LLP via USPS)
|
|
Filing
57
MINUTE ORDER dismissing plaintiff's claims against Trustee Virginia Burdette with prejudice and without costs ; striking as moot plaintiff's 32 Motion for Reconsideration ; LIFTING STAY and returning case to active docket ; RENOTING Defendants Cristina Mehling, Mehling Law Firm PLLC 44 Motion for Attorney's Fees : Noting Date 11/17/2017. Authorized by Judge Thomas S. Zilly. (SWT) (cc: Gordon Tilden Thomas & Cordell LLP via USPS)
|
|
Filing
53
MINUTE ORDER RE-NOTING Plaintiff's 32 MOTION for Reconsideration re 31 Order on Motion to Stay, Case Stayed, Terminate Deadlines and Hearings, and Defendants Mehling Law Firm PLLC and Cristina Mehling's 44 MOTION for Attorney Fees ; Noting Date 9/29/2017, Joint Status Report due by 9/29/2017. Authorized by Judge Thomas S. Zilly. (TH) (cc: Cristina Mehling via USPS)
|
|
Filing
52
MINUTE ORDER re parties' 49 Stipulation; Susannah Carr and Matthew Pierce of Gordon Tilden Thomas & Cordell LLP are permitted to withdraw as counsel of record for defendants Cristina Mehling and Mehling Law Firm PLLC, effective immediately. Authorized by Judge Thomas S. Zilly. (SWT) (cc: Cristina Mehling via USPS)
|
|
Filing
43
MINUTE ORDER granting Defendants' 42 Surreply/Motion to Strike, portion of Plaintiff's 39 Reply indicating that plaintiff intends to seek leave to amend its complaint to assert a claim for rescission ; deferring and re-noting Plaintiff's 32 MOTION for Reconsideration : Noting Date 8/11/2017 ; directing parties to file a Joint Status Report due by 8/11/2017. Authorized by Judge Thomas S. Zilly. (SWT)
|
|
Filing
33
MINUTE ORDER RE-NOTING plaintiff's 32 MOTION for Reconsideration for 6/16/2017, defendants' response due 6/12/17, reply due by noting date by Judge Thomas S. Zilly. (RS)
|
|
Filing
31
MINUTE ORDER denying in part and deferring in part plaintiff's 15 motion for judgment on the pleadings; granting the deferred portion of the Mehling defendants' 18 Motion to Stay; JSR due within 14 days after underlying litigation in King County Superior Court is completed or by 1/15/18; oral argument set for 5/12/17 at 10am is stricken by Judge Thomas S. Zilly.(RS)
|
|
Filing
30
MINUTE ORDER Setting Hearing on Defendants' 18 MOTION to Stay, and Plaintiff's 15 MOTION for Judgment on the Pleadings : Oral argument SET for Friday, 5/12/2017 at 10:00 AM. Authorized by Judge Thomas S. Zilly. (SWT)
|
|
Filing
24
MINUTE ORDER denying in part and deferring in part the Mehling Defendants' 18 MOTION to Stay Pending Resolution of Underlying Lawsuit. Authorized by Judge Thomas S. Zilly. (PM)
|
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.
