Williams v. Zimmer Biomet Spine Inc
This text of Williams v. Zimmer Biomet Spine Inc (Williams v. Zimmer Biomet Spine Inc) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. Arkansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS DELTA DIVISION
LORETTA SUE WILLIAMS and SCOTT WILLIAMS PLAINTIFFS
No: 2:20-cv-92-DPM
ZIMMER BIOMET SPINE, INC; ZIMMER BIOMET HOLDINGS, INC.; and JOHN DOE CORPORATIONS 1 & 2 DEFENDANTS
ORDER All material things considered, the Williamses’ motion, Doc. 14, is granted on a condition. FED. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(2); Kern v. TXO Production Corp., 738 F.2d 968, 970-71 (8th Cir. 1984); Blaes v. Johnson & Johnson, 858 F.3d 508, 512-15 (8th Cir. 2017). The Court concludes that almost all of Biomet’s lawyers’ work, and expenses incurred so far, can be recycled if the case is refiled. The condition: By 10 December 2021, Biomet may file a list of Rule 54(d) costs incurred. The Williamses must pay those costs when and if they refile their case. Biomet’s motion for summary judgment, Doc. 11, is denied as moot. The Court will withhold Judgment until the costs are pinned down.
So Ordered. gree J, D.P. Marshall Jr. United States District Judge a. heetnor 20 Al
2.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Williams v. Zimmer Biomet Spine Inc, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/williams-v-zimmer-biomet-spine-inc-ared-2021.