• All Courts
  • Federal Courts
  • Bankruptcies
  • PTAB
  • ITC
Track Search
Export
Download All
Active Filters1
Displaying 54-68 of 2,513 results

ORDER TO EXCLUDE

Document LAURA J CANTU vs. KYLE SMITH et al, DC-22-10595, ORDER MISC 1-ORDER_TO_EXCLUDE (Tex. St., Dallas Co., 68th District Ct. Aug. 5, 2024)
On Monday,July 29, 2024, the Court considered Defendants’Motion to Exclude Plaintiff's Trial Witnesses Ruben Vidal and Lorenzo Vidalfiled on June 14, 2024.
During the hearing, the Court spoke to Ruben Vidal and Ruben Vidal verbally agreed to voluntarily appear andsit for his deposition in the above-captioned case on Wednesday, August 7, 2024, at 1:30 p.m.at the offices of Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP located at 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 3600, Dallas, Texas 75202.
The Court further ordered that, should either Lorenzo Vidal or Ruben Vidal fail to appear at their depositions scheduled for August 7, the Court will issue capias warrants to secure their attendance.
The filer served this document via email generated by the efiling system on the date and to the personslisted below.
Filers muststill provide a certificate of service that complies with all applicable rules.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

PLAINTIFF (WRAY) MTN SEVER & ENTRY FNL JUDGMENT

Document TINA HECHT vs. ABRI HEALTH SERVICES, LLC, DC-24-01351, MOTION SEVER 1-PLAINTIFF_WRAY_MTN_SEVER__ENTRY_FNL_JUDGMENT (Tex. St., Dallas Co., 14th District Ct. Aug. 2, 20...
NOW COMESPlaintiff Paul Wray and moves for severance of his claims in the above- captioned lawsuit, and wouldstate as follows: On July 18, 2024, this Court signed an Order granting Plaintiff Wray’s Motion for Summary Judgment.
Asa result, Plaintiff Wray has no claims to present at trial in this case.
Accordingly, Plaintiff further requests the Court enter a Final Judgment on his claims.
Plaintiff makes this motion to permit his claims to be resolved in their entirety, while the claims of his co-Plaintiff, Tina Hecht, remain pending.
Of Counsel: Elizabeth Aten Lamberson State Bar No. 240207044
cite Cite Document
Analyze

ORDER -(PL) WRAY) MSJ

Document TINA HECHT vs. ABRI HEALTH SERVICES, LLC, DC-24-01351, ORDER JUDGMENT 1-ORDER_PL_WRAY_MSJ (Tex. St., Dallas Co., 14th District Ct. Jul. 18, 2024)
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that Plaintiff Paul Wray’s MOtion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED in its entirety.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that Plaintiff Paul Wray is awarded summary judgment on its cause of action against Defendant ABRI Health Services, LLC on its cause of action against ABRI Health Services, LLC for breach of contract.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that Plaintiff Paul Wray from ABRI Health Services, LLC in amount of 2024 came to be heard PlaintiffPaul Wray’s Motion for Summary judgment the have and recover g o ‘71:, $ ‘7 3'”, o (’1 for actual damages.
1 [Order Granting Plaintiff Paul Wray’s Motion for Summary Judgment
I certify that on March 28, 2024 a true and correct copy of the foregoing instrument was forwarded to all counsel of record in accordance with the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

ORDER - WITHDRAW ATTORNEY

Document ELSA S CLASING vs. DEBORAH D FISHER, CC-19-06829-B, ORDER WITHDRAW ATTORNEY 1-ORDER_WITHDRAW_ATTORNEY (Tex. St., Dallas Co., Co. Ct. at Law 2 Jun. 20, 2024)
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREEDthat Lane M. Webster’s Unopposed Motion to Withdraw as Counsel is GRANTEDinits entirety.
IT IS FURTHER ORDEREDthat Lane M. Webster is discharged as counsel for Plaintiff Elisa S. Clasing and has no future responsibilities or obligations on behalf of Plaintiff Elsa S. Clasing in this case.
he Court noes Ha GN apptarance WAS made on dune 7, Ze2y ny new ewunsel Ry Yank, SIGNEDthis 20 day of_Oune
The filer served this document via email generated by the efiling system on the date and to the personslisted below.
Filers muststill provide a certificate of service that complies with all applicable rules.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

SCHEDULING ORDER

Document TINA HECHT, et al vs. ABRI HEALTH SERVICES, LLC, DC-24-01351, SCHEDULING ORDER 1-SCHEDULING_ORDER (Tex. St., Dallas Co., 14th District Ct. Jun. 17, 2024)
All counsel of record as wellas all parties are required to appearat the Initial Trial Setting.
Any amendedpleadings asserting new causes of action or affirmative defenses must be 4, filed no later than thirty (30) days before the end of the discovery period and any other amended pleadings must be filed no later than seven (7) days after the end of the discovery period.
Permission to file a brief in excess of these page limitations may be granted with leave of the Court upon a showing of compelling reasons.
On or before ten (10) days before the Initial Trial Setting, the attorneys in charge for all parties shall meet in person to confer on stipulations regarding the materials to be submitted to the Court under this paragraph and attempt to maximize agreement on such matters.
By 4 pm on the Thursday before the Initial Trial Setting, the parties shall file with the Court the materials stated in Rule 166(e)-(1), an estimate of the length of trial, designation of deposition testimony to be offered in direct examination, and any motions in limine.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

NOTICE OF ENTRY OF ORDER OF REMAND

Document TINA HECHT, et al vs. ABRI HEALTH SERVICES, LLC, DC-24-01351, ORDER REMAND POST JUDG MOTION OCA and REOPEN CASE 1-NOTICE_OF_ENTRY_OF_ORDER_OF_REMAND (Tex...
Plaintiffs Tina Hecht and Paul Wray (“Plaintiffs”) file this Notice of Entry of Order of Remandto notify the Court that the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Texas has entered an Order remanding the above-referenced lawsuit to this Court for further proceedings.
A true and correct copy of the Court’s order is attached hereto as Exhibit “A.”
Respectfully submitted,
6333 E. Mockingbird Ln., Ste.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

E-SERVE DWOP ORDER

Document IN RE: M. ARTHUR GENSLER, JR. & ASSOCIATES, INC., DC-23-18255, CORRESPONDENCE LETTER TO FILE 1-ESERVE_DWOP_ORDER (Tex. St., Dallas Co., 162nd District Ct. May. 13, 202...
To: ALL ATTORNEYS/PARTIES Please see the attached order signed and entered in your case.
Automated Certificate of eService This automated certificate of service was created by the efiling system.
The filer served this document via email generated by the efiling system on the date and to the personslisted below.
The rules governing certificates of service have not changed.
Filers muststill provide a certificate of service that complies with all applicable rules.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

DWOP ORDER

Document IN RE: M. ARTHUR GENSLER, JR. & ASSOCIATES, INC., DC-23-18255, CORRESPONDENCE LETTER TO FILE 2-DWOP_ORDER (Tex. St., Dallas Co., 162nd District Ct. May. 13, 2024)
In the District Court Dallas County, Texas 162nd District Court
The Court finds that Plaintiff(s) was duly notified of a dismissal hearing set on May \O ol yf .
The Plaintiff(s) having failed to take certain action heretofore specified by the court within the time period prescribed, and having not disposed of this case, the court finds that the cause should be dismissed for want of prosecution pursuant to Tex.
R. Civ.
Accordingly, IT IS ORDEREDthat the case is dismissed for want of prosecution with costs taxed against Plaintiff(s), for which execution issue.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

ORDER GRANTING NONSUIT MAILED

Document IN RE: TRANE U.S. INC., RICHARD CARSON, DANIEL SHABO AND JOHN DOES 1-10, DC-23-20303, NOTE CLERKS 1-ORDER_GRANTING_NONSUIT_MAILED (Tex. St., Dallas Co., 192nd Dis...
Civil Case Cover Sheet In The District Court of Dallas County, Texas
cite Cite Document
Analyze

ORDER GRANTING NONSUIT MAILED

Document IN RE: TRANE U.S. INC., RICHARD CARSON, DANIEL SHABO AND JOHN DOES 1-10, DC-23-20303, NOTE CLERKS 2-ORDER_GRANTING_NONSUIT_MAILED (Tex. St., Dallas Co., 192nd Dis...
Civil Case Cover Sheet In The District Court of Dallas County, Texas
cite Cite Document
Analyze

ORDER GRANTING NONSUIT MAILED

Document IN RE: TRANE U.S. INC., RICHARD CARSON, DANIEL SHABO AND JOHN DOES 1-10, DC-23-20303, NOTE CLERKS 3-ORDER_GRANTING_NONSUIT_MAILED (Tex. St., Dallas Co., 192nd Dis...
Civil Case Cover Sheet In The District Court of Dallas County, Texas
cite Cite Document
Analyze

ORDER DENYING DEF.'S MSJ

Document LAURA J CANTU vs. KYLE SMITH et al, DC-22-10595, ORDER DENY 1-ORDER_DENYING_DEFS_MSJ (Tex. St., Dallas Co., 68th District Ct. Mar. 12, 2024)
On March 11, 2024, the Court considered Defendants’ Second Motion Summary Judgment (Defendants’ “Second MSJ”’).
After reviewing the Second MSJ, Plaintiff's objection and response, the pleadings and evidence onfile in this Cause, and the arguments of counsel, this Court is of the opinion that the Motion should be DENIED.
The filer served this document via email generated by the efiling system on the date and to the personslisted below.
The rules governing certificates of service have not changed.
Filers muststill provide a certificate of service that complies with all applicable rules.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

ORDER TO COMPEL

Document LAURA J CANTU vs. KYLE SMITH et al, DC-22-10595, ORDER COMPEL 1-ORDER_TO_COMPEL (Tex. St., Dallas Co., 68th District Ct. Feb. 14, 2024)
On February 12, 2024, the Court considered Defendant Kyle Smith’s Motion to Compel Discovery from Plaintiff Laura Cantu (the “Motion”).
For the avoidance of doubt, Plaintiff must produce any documents that relate to whether she has or has not suffered a substantial disruption in her daily routine or a high degree of mental distress.
For the avoidance of doubt, Plaintiff must produce any documents that relate to whether she has or has not suffered a substantial disruption in her daily routine or a high degree of mental distress.
Plaintiff shall produce a complete copy of her Facebook and Instagram account history from April 1, 2021, to present.
The filer served this document via email generated by the efiling system on the date and to the persons listed below.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

ORDER - JUDGMENT

Document LAURA J CANTU vs. KYLE SMITH et al, DC-22-10595, ORDER JUDGMENT 1-ORDER_JUDGMENT (Tex. St., Dallas Co., 68th District Ct. Feb. 13, 2024)
On February 5, 2024, the Court considered Defendants’ Motion for Traditionaland No- Evidence Summary Judgment (the “Motion”).
After reviewing the Motion, Plaintiffs response thereto, the pleadings and evidence onfile, and the arguments of counsel, this Court is of the opinion that the Motion should be GRANTEDin part and DENIEDinpart.
Retaliation and Wrongful Termination DISMISSED as to ALL DEFENDANTS under Tex.
10|Civil Conspiracy DISMISSED as to ALL DEFENDANTS as to predicate claims in Counts | and 3-9 11|Actual Authority DISMISSEDas to ALL DEFENDANTS as to predicate claims in Counts 1 and 3-9 DISMISSED astoALLDEFENDANTS 2 ApparentAuthority
Vicarious Liability (Piercing the Corporate Veil) as to the theory of single business enterprise Ratification DISMISSEDas to ALL DEFENDANTS as to predicate claims in Counts | and 3-9 for all other theories
cite Cite Document
Analyze

ORDER DNEY IN PART AND GRANT IN PART MSJ

Document LAURA J CANTU vs. KYLE SMITH et al, DC-22-10595, ORDER DENY 1-ORDER_DNEY_IN_PART_AND_GRANT_IN_PART_MSJ (Tex. St., Dallas Co., 68th District Ct. Feb. 8, 2024)
On February 5, 2024, the Court considered Defendants’ Motion for Traditional and No- Evidence Summary Judgment (the “Motion”).
After reviewing the Motion, Plaintiff’s response thereto, the pleadings and evidence on file, and the arguments of counsel, this Court is of the opinion that the Motion should be GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.
The filer served this document via email generated by the efiling system on the date and to the persons listed below.
The rules governing certificates of service have not changed.
Filers must still provide a certificate of service that complies with all applicable rules.
cite Cite Document
Analyze
<< 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... >>