Griggs v. Kenworth of Montgomery, Inc. et al
Filing
97
ORDER DENYING 12 AND 22 MOTIONS to Change Venue and the 26 and 52 MOTIONS to Compel Arbitration without prejudice and with leave to reinstate, following resolution of def Arrow Truck Sales, Inc.'s pending motion to dismiss, as further set out in order. Signed by Honorable Judge Myron H. Thompson on 9/22/17. (Attachments: # 1 civil appeals checklist)(djy, )
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION
ALTON R. GRIGGS, JR.,
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
YUSEF BRINSON,
)
)
Plaintiff-Intervenor,
)
)
v.
)
)
KENWORTH OF MONTGOMERY,
)
INC., and ARROW TRUCK
)
SALES, INC., a corporation, )
)
Defendants.
)
CIVIL ACTION NO.
2:16cv406-MHT
(WO)
ORDER
Now
motions:
pending
before
defendant
the
Kenworth
court
of
are
the
following
Montgomery,
Inc.’s
motion to change venue (doc. no. 12) filed on June 27,
2016;
defendant
Arrow
Truck
Sales,
Inc.’s
motion
to
change venue (doc. no. 22) filed on July 11, 2016;
defendant
Kenworth
of
Montgomery’s
motion
to
compel
arbitration (doc. no. 26) filed on July 18, 2016; and
defendant
Kenworth
of
Montgomery’s
motion
to
compel
intervenor Yusef Brinson’s claims to arbitration (doc.
no.
52)
filed
on
November
29,
2016.
Also
pending
before the United States Magistrate Judge is Arrow’s
motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction (doc. no.
58)
filed
on
December
8,
2016.
Arrow’s
motion
to
dismiss came under submission on September 5, 2017, and
resolution of that motion will affect the course of
this litigation.
Accordingly, upon consideration of the motions, and
for
good
cause,
it
is
ORDERED
that
the
motions
to
change venue (doc. nos. 12 & 22) and the motions to
compel
without
arbitration
prejudice
(doc.
and
nos.
with
26
&
52)
leave
to
are
denied
reinstate,
following resolution of defendant Arrow Truck Sales,
Inc.’s pending motion to dismiss.
DONE, this the 22nd day of September, 2017.
/s/ Myron H. Thompson
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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.
Why Is My Information Online?