Jack v. Borg-Warner Morse Tec, LLC, C17-0537JLR. (2018)
Court: District Court, D. Washington
Number: infdco20180925i26
Visitors: 3
Filed: Sep. 24, 2018
Latest Update: Sep. 24, 2018
Summary: ORDER DIRECTING RESPONSE TO MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION JAMES L. ROBART , District Judge . Before the court is Plaintiffs Leslie Jack and David Jack's (collectively, "Plaintiffs") motion for reconsideration of portions of the court's September 17, 2018, order on summary judgment motions. (Mot. (Dkt. # 714).) Pursuant to Local Rule LCR 7(h)(3), the court ORDERS Defendant Union Pacific Railroad ("Union Pacific") to respond to Plaintiffs' motion for reconsideration no later than Thursday, Septe
Summary: ORDER DIRECTING RESPONSE TO MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION JAMES L. ROBART , District Judge . Before the court is Plaintiffs Leslie Jack and David Jack's (collectively, "Plaintiffs") motion for reconsideration of portions of the court's September 17, 2018, order on summary judgment motions. (Mot. (Dkt. # 714).) Pursuant to Local Rule LCR 7(h)(3), the court ORDERS Defendant Union Pacific Railroad ("Union Pacific") to respond to Plaintiffs' motion for reconsideration no later than Thursday, Septem..
More
ORDER DIRECTING RESPONSE TO MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
JAMES L. ROBART, District Judge.
Before the court is Plaintiffs Leslie Jack and David Jack's (collectively, "Plaintiffs") motion for reconsideration of portions of the court's September 17, 2018, order on summary judgment motions. (Mot. (Dkt. # 714).) Pursuant to Local Rule LCR 7(h)(3), the court ORDERS Defendant Union Pacific Railroad ("Union Pacific") to respond to Plaintiffs' motion for reconsideration no later than Thursday, September 27, 2018. See Local Rules W.D. Wash. LCR 7(h)(3). Union Pacific shall file a responsive memorandum no longer than eight pages. Plaintiffs shall not file a reply. The court DIRECTS the Clerk to re-note Plaintiffs' motion for reconsideration (Dkt. # 714) to
Source: Leagle
