Dahse et al v. C. R. Bard, Inc.
| Janet Dahse and Leroy William Dahse, Jr. |
| C. R. Bard, Inc. |
| 2:2012cv02701 |
| July 6, 2012 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia |
| Charleston Office |
| XX US, Outside State |
| Joseph R. Goodwin |
| Personal Injury- Product Liability |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
| 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
255
AMENDED MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER (Defendants Motion for Partial Summary Judgment) The 254 Memorandum Opinion and Order enter 12/7/2016 is amended to correct the case style; the 63 Motion for Partial Summary Judgment is denied. Signed by Judge Joseph R. Goodwin on 12/8/2016. (cc: counsel of record; any unrepresented party) (kp)
|
|
Filing
254
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER (Defendant's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment) denying 63 MOTION by C. R. Bard, Inc. for Partial Summary Judgment on Plaintiffs Punitive Damages Claims. Signed by Judge Joseph R. Goodwin on 12/7/2016. (cc: counsel of record; any unrepresented party) (kp)
|
|
Filing
127
ORDER Plaintiffs' 105 Omnibus Motion re: Non-Retained Corporate Experts is DENIED; Plaintiffs' 102 Omnibus Motion re: Physician Experts is DENIED; C. R. Bard's 110 Motion to Exclude is DENIED; C. R. Bard's 118 Omnibus Mo tion is DENIED; and Plaintiffs' 120 Motion to Strike is DENIED as moot. The parties have leave to file additional expert-specific Daubert motions and the court will modify an existing PTO to reflect these deadlines. Signed by Judge Joseph R. Goodwin on 1/28/2015. (cc: attys; any unrepresented party) (ras)
|
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.
