Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Jessica Durkin, Both Individually , and As Administratrix of the Estate and Administratrix Ad Prosequendum of v. Wabash National

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY


March 28, 2013

JESSICA DURKIN, BOTH INDIVIDUALLY , AND AS ADMINISTRATRIX OF THE ESTATE AND ADMINISTRATRIX AD PROSEQUENDUM OF THE ESTATE OF WILLIAM R. GANGELL, JR., DECEASED, PLAINTIFFS,
v.
WABASH NATIONAL, DEFENDANT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Hon. Joseph H. Rodriguez

ORDER

These matters having come before the Court upon Motions of Defendant Wabash National Corporation (hereinafter "Wabash"), for Summary Judgment [Dkt. No. 149] pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 56, to Preclude the Testimony of Plaintiff's Experts Brooks Rugemer [Dkt. No. 152] and William Vigilante [Dkt. No. 154] pursuant to Fed. R. Evid. 702, and to Strike Plaintiff's Responses to the Statement of Undisputed Facts [174] pursuant to L. Civ. R. 56.1(a), and the Court having considered the written submissions as well as the arguments advanced in the two hearings in this matter on February 20, 2013 and March 12, 2013, and the Court determining that it will reserve decision on Defendant's Summary Judgment motion until such time that it can review the transcript record of the hearing on March 12, 2013, therefore,

For the reasons set forth on the record during the hearings in this matter and for the reasons outlined in the Court's Opinion of even date,

IT IS on this 28th Day of March, 2013 hereby ORDERED that The Court will reserve its decision on Summary Judgment [Dkt. No. 149] and re-calendar the motion for April 29, 2013; and it is further ORDERED that Defendant's Motion to Preclude the Testimony of Plaintiff's Expert Brooks Rugemer [Dkt. No. 152] is DENIED consistent with the Court's Opinion; and it is further

ORDERED that Defendant's Motion to Preclude the Testimony of Plaintiff's Expert William Vigilante [Dkt. No. 154] is DENIED consistent with the Court's Opinion; and it is further

ORDERED that Defendant's Motion to Strike Plaintiff's Responses to the Statement of Undisputed Facts [174] is GRANTED IN PART.

Hon. Joseph H. Rodriguez, United States District Judge

20130328

© 1992-2013 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.