Newsroom
Farrar et al. v. Mobil Oil Corporation
Farrar, et al. v Mobil Oil Corporation, Stevens County, Kansas, Case No. 01 CV 12
Click here for Case Profile Page
← Older posts |Mobil’s Notice of Appeal
Mobil appealed from the Court’s adverse ruling regarding its breach of the 1984 Settlement Agreement.
Order granting Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment regarding Mobil’s breach of the 1984 Settlement Agreement
On March 15, 2012, the Court entered an Order granting plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment on their claim that Mobil breached the 1984 Settlement Agreement.
Case Management Order
The Court entered a Case Management Order which establishes certain timetables for pretrial matters, and sets a trial date on October 29, 2012.
Memorandum in Support of Plaintiffs’ Motion for Order Determining that Certain Rulings Made by Judge Smith and Affirmed by the Court of Appeals Constitute the Law of the Case
Plaintiffs’ submitted this Memorandum in support of their motion for an order determining that the prior rulings of Hon. Tom R. Smith on August 18, 2009, and affirmed by the Kansas Court of Appeals, constitute the law of the case.
Plaintiffs’ Motion for Order Determining that Certain Rulings Made by Judge Smith and Affirmed by the Court of Appeals Constitute the Law of the Case
Plaintiffs ask the Court for an order determining that the prior rulings made by Hon. Tom R. Smith on August 18, 2009, and affirmed by the Kansas Court of Appeals, constitute the law of the case.
Order – granting Mobil’s motion for an extension of time to respond to Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment
The court granted Mobil 90 days to conduct discovery and respond to Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment.
Plaintiffs’ Reply Concerning Supplemental Authority Regarding Mobil’s Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment
Plaintiffs filed a reply to the argument contained in Mobil’s Response to Plaintiffs’ Supplemental Authority regarding Mobil’s motion for an extension of time to respond to Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment.
Mobil’s Response to Plaintiffs’ Supplemental Authority Regarding its Motion for Continuance in Response to Motion for Summary Judgment
Mobil filed this response to Plaintiffs’ further legal authority submitted to the Court.
Plaintiffs’ Statement of Supplemental Authority Regarding Mobil’s Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment
Plaintiffs submitted further legal authority regarding Mobil’s motion for an extension of time to respond to Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment.
Mobil’s Reply in Support of its Motion for Continuance in Response to Motion for Summary Judgment
Mobil filed this reply regarding its motion for an extension of time to respond to Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment.
← Older posts |
