KERNOSH v. FRIEGHT CONCEPTS, INC. et al
Filing
121
ORDER/OPINION THAT PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AGAINST DEFENDANT FREIGHT CONCEPTS, INC. (DOC. NO. 93) IS DENIED. SIGNED BY HONORABLE JAMES KNOLL GARDNER ON 11/12/15. 11/12/15 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED TO UNREP AND E-MAILED. (ky, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
l~ I
THEODORE J. KERNOSH,
Plaintiff
CIVIL ACTION NO. 13-6069
v.
DE JAGER CONSTRUCTION, INC.;
FREIGHT CONCEPTS, INC.;
ABC BUSINESS ENTITIES 1-10 (fictitious names)
and JOHN DOES 1-10 (fictitious names)
Defendants
DE JAGER CONSTRUCTION, INC.,
Third Party Plaintiff
v.
SUGAR HILL DESIGN & CONSTRUCTION, LLC
Third Party Defendant
THEODORE J. KERNOSH,
Plaintiff
v.
CIVIL ACTION NO. 15-3325
ACCEL GROUP, INC.
Defendant
ORDER
AND NOW, this
day of November, 2015, upon consideration of the
following documents:
Plaintiffs Motion for SanC:tions Against Defendant Freight
Concepts, Inc. (Docket No. 93) filed September 22, 2015;
Ans\ver to Plaintiffs Motion for Sanctions and
Memorandum of Law in Support of Answer to Plaintiffs
Motion for Sanctions (Docket Nos. 95 and 95-4) filed by
Defendant, Freight Concepts on September 24, 2015;
Plaintiff Theodore J. Kemosh's Reply Brief in
Further Support of Plaintiffs Motion for Sanctions
Against Defendant Freight Concepts, Inc. (Docket
No. 99) filed October 1, 2015; and
Plaintiff Theodore J. Kemosh's Supplemental Reply
Brief in Further Support of Plaintiffs Motion for
Sanctions Against Defendant Freight Concepts, Inc.
(Docket No. 114) filed November 4, 2015;
upon consideration of a sanctions hearing on the record with counsel for all interested parties on
November 5, 2015, and for the reasons expressed in the foregoing Memorandum,
IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiffs motion for sanctions is DENIED.
BY THE fOURTĀ·
J-.lc___
HENRY S. PERKIN,
United States Magistrate Judge
2
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?