Tyger v. Precision Drilling Corp. et al

Filing 277

ORDER (memorandum filed previously as separate docket entry) - IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants' 239 Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. The Motion is granted with respect to the applicable statute of limitat ions. It is denied in all other respects.; Plaintiffs' 245 Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED; and Defendants' 259 Motion to Strike Plaintiffs' Statement of Undisputed Material Facts is DENIED. Signed by Honorable Matthew W. Brann on 4/11/2018. (jr)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
No. 4:11-CV-01913

RODNEY TYGER and SHAWN
WADSWORTH, on behalf of
themselves and those similarly situated,

(Judge Brann)

Plaintiffs.
v.
PRECISION DRILLING CORP., et al.,
Defendant.

ORDER
AND NOW, this 11th day of April 2018, in accordance with the
Memorandum Opinion of this same date, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 239) is GRANTED
in part and DENIED in part. The Motion is granted with respect to the
applicable statute of limitations. It is denied in all other respects.
2. Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 245) is DENIED.
3. Defendants’ Motion to Strike Plaintiffs' Statement of Undisputed Material
Facts (ECF No. 259) is DENIED.
BY THE COURT:

s/ Matthew W. Brann
Matthew W. Brann
United States District Judge