1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. SWANN v. TIME WARNER ENTERAINMENT COMPANY, L.P.
 

SWANN v. TIME WARNER ENTERAINMENT COMPANY, L.P.

Case No. 3:13-cv-042.

EDWIN J. SWANN, et al., Plaintiffs, v. TIME WARNER ENTERAINMENT COMPANY, L.P., Defendant.

United States District Court, S.D. Ohio, Western Division, Dayton.

August 29, 2014.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Edwin J. Swann, Plaintiff, represented by Adam R Webber, Falke & Dunphy, LLC, Patrick Keith Dunphy, Falke & Dunphy LLC & Joseph P. DiPasquale, Falke & Dunphy, LLC.

Charles Bryant, Plaintiff, represented by Adam R Webber, Falke & Dunphy, LLC, Patrick Keith Dunphy, Falke & Dunphy LLC & Joseph P. DiPasquale, Falke & Dunphy, LLC.

Jerome Turner, Plaintiff, represented by Adam R Webber, Falke & Dunphy, LLC, Patrick Keith Dunphy, Falke & Dunphy LLC & Joseph P. DiPasquale, Falke & Dunphy, LLC.

Sylvan Vaughn, Plaintiff, represented by Adam R Webber, Falke & Dunphy, LLC, Patrick Keith Dunphy, Falke & Dunphy LLC & Joseph P. DiPasquale, Falke & Dunphy, LLC.

Matthew Massey, Plaintiff, represented by Adam R Webber, Falke & Dunphy, LLC, Patrick Keith Dunphy, Falke & Dunphy LLC & Joseph P. DiPasquale, Falke & Dunphy, LLC.

Clarence Harper, Plaintiff, represented by Adam R Webber, Falke & Dunphy, LLC, Patrick Keith Dunphy, Falke & Dunphy LLC & Joseph P. DiPasquale, Falke & Dunphy, LLC.

Time Warner Entertainment Company, L.P., Defendant, represented by Michael D Kabat, Wargo & French LLP, Rachel E Sankey, Wargo French, Anthony Edward Giardino, Wargo French LLP, David M Pernini, Wargo & French LLP, Glen Richard McMurry, Dungan & LeFevre Co., LPA, Nathan D Chapman, Wargo &French LLP & Joseph Steven Justice, Dungan & LeFevre Co., L.P.A..

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY (DOC. 32) AND SETTING A STATUS CONFERENCE ON OCTOBER 14, 2014 AT 2:00 P.M.

MICHAEL J. NEWMAN, Magistrate Judge.

This civil consent case is presently before the Court on Plaintiffs' motion to compel discovery. Doc. 32. Defendant Time Warner Entertainment Company, L.P. ("TWC") filed a response to Plaintiffs' motion to compel. Doc. 35. Plaintiffs filed a reply memorandum in support of their motion. Doc. 37...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases