Crow et al v. Trans-System, Inc. et al
| Steven Crow and Cheryl Crow |
| Cosmo Specialty Fibers, Inc., Trans-System, Inc., AirGas Specialty Products, Inc., John Doe Two Company, John Doe One and Jane Doe One |
| 3:2015cv05665 |
| September 17, 2015 |
| US District Court for the Western District of Washington |
| Tacoma Office |
| Pacific |
| Karen L Strombom |
| P.I.: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury |
| 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
229
ORDER ON DEFENDANT TRANS-SYSTEM, INC.'S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR SUPERSEDEAS BOND PURSUANT TO FRCP 62, granting in part and denying in part 223 Motion for Bond. Defendant Trans-System, Inc., d/b/a James J. Williams Bulk Transport is ORDERED to post a supersedeas bond in the amount of $6,491,122 by January 31, 2018. Signed by Judge Robert J. Bryan. (JL)
|
|
Filing
104
ORDER ON DEFENDANT AIRGAS SPECIALTY PRODUCTS INC.'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, by Judge Robert J. Bryan.(DK)
|
|
Filing
99
ORDER denying 82 Motion for Sanctions. Signed by Judge Robert J. Bryan. (JL)
|
|
Filing
98
ORDER granting in part and denying in part 78 Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed by Judge Robert J. Bryan. (JL)
|
|
Filing
75
ORDER granting in part and denying in part 55 Motion for Summary Judgment; denying 60 Motion for Joinder. Signed by Judge Robert J. Bryan. (JL)
|
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.
