ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY BUILDING SOLUTIONS, LLC v. CITY OF JACKSON

Cause No. 3:12CV389-LG-JCG.

ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY BUILDING SOLUTIONS, LLC, et al., Plaintiffs, v. CITY OF JACKSON, MISSISSIPPI, et al., Defendants.

United States District Court, S.D. Mississippi, Northern Division.

September 18, 2014.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Advanced Technology Building Solutions, LLC, Plaintiff, represented by Robert Nicholas Norris , WATSON & NORRIS, PLLC & Louis H. Watson, Jr. , WATSON & NORRIS, PLLC.

Donald Hewitt, Plaintiff, represented by Robert Nicholas Norris , WATSON & NORRIS, PLLC, Benjamin Lyle Robinson , TAYLOR, WELLONS, POLITZ & DUHE, APLC & Louis H. Watson, Jr. , WATSON & NORRIS, PLLC.

City of Jackson, Mississippi, Defendant, represented by Pieter Teeuwissen , PIETER TEEUWISSEN, PLLC, Claire Barker , CITY OF JACKSON, Gail Wright Lowery , GAIL WRIGHT LOWERY, PLLC, Imhotep Alkebu-lan , IMHOTEP ALKEBU-LAN, ATTORNEY & Lara E. Gill .

Jackson Redevelopment Authority, Defendant, represented by Benjamin Lyle Robinson , TAYLOR, WELLONS, POLITZ & DUHE, APLC & Fred L. Banks, Jr. , PHELPS DUNBAR, LLP.

Jason Brookins, Defendant, represented by Benjamin Lyle Robinson , TAYLOR, WELLONS, POLITZ & DUHE, APLC & Fred L. Banks, Jr. , PHELPS DUNBAR, LLP.

Ronnie Crudup, in His Official Capacity as Jackson Redevelopment Authority Chairman, Defendant, represented by Benjamin Lyle Robinson , TAYLOR, WELLONS, POLITZ & DUHE, APLC & Fred L. Banks, Jr. , PHELPS DUNBAR, LLP.

Brian Fenelon, Defendant, represented by Benjamin Lyle Robinson , TAYLOR, WELLONS, POLITZ & DUHE, APLC & Fred L. Banks, Jr. , PHELPS DUNBAR, LLP.

H.A. Beau Whittington, Jr., Defendant, represented by Benjamin Lyle Robinson , TAYLOR, WELLONS, POLITZ & DUHE, APLC & Fred L. Banks, Jr. , PHELPS DUNBAR, LLP.

Mayor Tony Yarber, Defendant, represented by Pieter Teeuwissen , PIETER TEEUWISSEN, PLLC, Imhotep Alkebu-lan , IMHOTEP ALKEBU-LAN, ATTORNEY & Lara E. Gill .


ORDER DENYING THE JRA DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

LOUIS GUIROLA, Jr., Chief District Judge.

BEFORE THE COURT is the Motion for Reconsideration [162] filed by the JRA defendants.1 The plaintiffs have filed a response in opposition to the Motion, and the JRA defendants have filed a reply. After reviewing the submissions of the parties and the applicable law, the Court finds that the...

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