Legal Opinion

Cheryl & Co. v. Krueger

District Court, S.D. Ohio

Decided December 4, 2019No. 2:18-cv-01485Unknown

1Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION CHERYL & CO., Plaintiff, v. Civil Action 2:18-cv-1485 Judge Edmund A. Sargus, Jr. Magistrate Judge Jolson CHERYL L. KRUEGER, et al., Defendants. OPINION AND ORDER This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff Cheryl & Co.’s (“Cheryl’s”) Motion to Compel Discovery and to Strike Errata Street. (Doc. 85). For the reasons below, Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel is DENIED, and Plaintiff’s Motion to Strike Errata Sheet is DENIED without prejudice. (Id.). I. BACKGROUND Elsewhere, the Court has summarized the…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. William C. Lewis v. Acb Business Services, Inc., (96-3093/3498), American Express Travel Related Services Company, Inc. James P. Connors, (96-3498)Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1998
  2. Hancock v. DodsonCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1992
  3. Reed v. BaxterCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1998
  4. Libbey Glass, Inc. v. OneidaDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 1999
  5. Talismanic Props., LLC v. Tipp CityDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 2017

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API