Bennett et al v. Skyline Corporation et al
| Gabriel Bennett and Tiffany Bennett |
| Skyline Corporation, Bob's Quality Homes, Inc. and Belpre Savings Bank |
| 1:2014cv00129 |
| August 5, 2014 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia |
| Clarksburg Office |
| Calhoun |
| Irene M. Keeley |
| Other Contract |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1442 |
| 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
46
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT BELPRE'S MOTION TO DISMISS: It is ORDERED that Belpre's 33 Motion to Dismiss Count 5 of the Amended Complaint is DENIED, its Motion to Dismiss Count 7 of the Amended Complaint is GRANTED, and Count 7 as it pertains to Belpre is DISMISSED. Signed by District Judge Irene M. Keeley on 4/14/15. (cnd)
|
|
Filing
45
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT SKYLINE'S MOTION TO DISMISS: It is ORDERED that Skyline's 35 Motion to Dismiss Count 4 of the Amended Complaint is GRANTED and its 35 Motion to Dismiss Count 3 of the Amended Complaint is DENIED. Signed by District Judge Irene M. Keeley on 4/10/15. (cnd)
|
|
Filing
23
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT BELPRE'S MOTION 15 TO DISMISS. Signed by District Judge Irene M. Keeley on 10/7/2014. (tlg)
|
|
Filing
21
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT SKYLINE'S MOTION TO DISMISS (DKT. NO. 10 ). Signed by District Judge Irene M. Keeley on 10/3/14. (mh)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
- 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.
