HARROLD v. LIBERTY INSURANCE UNDERWRITERS

Civ. Action Nos. 13-762, 13-831

RANDALL HARROLD v. LIBERTY INSURANCE UNDERWRITERS, ET AL. IN THE MATTER OF COMPLAINT OF WEEKS MARINE INC., as owner and operator of the BT 229, for Exoneration from or Limitation of Liability.

United States District Court, M.D. Louisiana.

November 6, 2014.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Randall Harrold, Plaintiff, represented by Tony Clayton , Clayton, Fruge & Ward, Michael Paul Fruge' , Clayton and Fruge, R. Blake Brunkenhoefer , Brunkenhoefer Turman, PLLC & Richard J Ward, III , Clayton & Fruge.

Southern Crane & Hydraulics, L.L.C., Defendant, represented by Francis A. Courtenay, Jr. , Deutsch, Kerrigan & Stiles, David K. Groome, Jr. , Deutsch, Kerrigan & Stiles & James Edward Courtenay , Deutsch, Kerrigan & Stiles.

Weeks Marine, Inc., Defendant, represented by Matthew Francis Popp , Waits, Emmett, Popp & Teich, L.L.C., John Francis Emmett , Waits, Emmett & Popp, Jordan Nichole Teich , Waits, Emmett & Popp, Mark Andrew Hill , Waits, Emmett, and Popp LLC & Randolph Jean Waits , Waits, Emmett & Popp.

Liberty Insurance Underwriters, Inc., Defendant, represented by Francis A. Courtenay, Jr. , Deutsch, Kerrigan & Stiles, David K. Groome, Jr. , Deutsch, Kerrigan & Stiles & James Edward Courtenay , Deutsch, Kerrigan & Stiles.

Aerotek, Inc., Defendant, represented by Mark Lynn Clark , Brown, Sims, PC, Kimberly E. Tracey , Browns Sims & Lisa M. Africk , Brown Sims, PC.

Weeks Marine, Inc., Cross Claimant, represented by Matthew Francis Popp , Waits, Emmett, Popp & Teich, L.L.C., John Francis Emmett , Waits, Emmett & Popp, Jordan Nichole Teich , Waits, Emmett & Popp, Mark Andrew Hill , Waits, Emmett, and Popp LLC & Randolph Jean Waits , Waits, Emmett & Popp.

Southern Crane & Hydraulics, L.L.C., Cross Defendant, represented by Francis A. Courtenay, Jr. , Deutsch, Kerrigan & Stiles, David K. Groome, Jr. , Deutsch, Kerrigan & Stiles & James Edward Courtenay , Deutsch, Kerrigan & Stiles.


ORDER

JOHN W. deGRAVELLES, District Judge.

This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff's First Amended Motion for Reconsideration of Order Remanding Claims to State Court (R.Doc. 50) ("Amended Motion to Remand". The Court previously denied this motion. (R.Doc. 57). However, the Court has the authority to reopen sua sponte motions for remand.. See Perritt v. Westlake Vinyls Co., LP, 986 F.Supp...

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