Douglas E. Miller

“For the foregoing reasons, the court DENIES Defendant SpartanNash's Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 19).”

“The City's Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF NO. 52) is GRANTED, and the Clerk shall enter judgment in favor of the Defendant City of Chesapeake on all three Complaints in the consolidated case.”

“For the foregoing reasons, the Board's Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF NO. 50) is GRANTED, and the Clerk shall enter judgment in favor of the Defendant Portsmouth School Board on the failure to promote claim and DISMISS the retaliation claim for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.”

“The Defendants have carried their burden, and the Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF NO. 31) is therefore GRANTED. The Clerk shall enter judgment in favor of the Defendants, the Commonwealth of Virginia and the Virginia Department of State Police.”

“Both parties have consented to proceed before a magistrate judge in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 73. (ECF No. 45). ... Accordingly, for the reasons explained in detail below, the court GRANTS Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 53).”

“For the foregoing reasons, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 216(b), the Court GRANTS Plaintiffs Conditional Class Certification and Notice under the FLSA to include the following similarly situated employees in the collective action: All individuals who are or were employed by SRA at some time between May 7, 2011 and the present and worked on SRA's MCS Afloat Contract...”

“ORDER granting plaintiffs' 34 Motion for Stay of Proceedings and to Compel Arbitration; directing the parties to do one of the following within 10 days: 1) submit stipulation as to terms of any agreed consolidation of the arbitration proceedings, or 2) contact the Magistrate Judges' Courtroom Deputies to schedule an evidentiary hearing regarding the merits of consolidation under N.C. Gen. Stat. l-569.10(a). Signed by Magistrate Judge Douglas E. Miller and filed on 7/15/10.”

“For the foregoing reasons, the undersigned recommends that Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 13) be DENIED. ... The court, having examined Defendants' Objections to the R&R, and having made de novo findings with respect thereto, ADOPTS AND APPROVES IN FULL the findings and recommendations set forth in the R&R of the United States Magistrate Judge... Defendants' Motion to Dismiss is DENIED.”

“For the foregoing reasons, the undersigned RECOMMENDS that the Court GRANT Siemens' Motion for Default Judgment (ECF No. 14), and enter judgment in favor of Siemens Industry, Inc. against Tidal Mechanical in the amount of $39,985.00. ... The Court hereby ADOPTS the findings and recommendations set forth in the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge filed on November 18, 2015, and Plaintiff Siemens Industry, Inc.'s Motion for Default Judgment against Defendant Tidal Mechanical, Inc., ECF No. 14, is GRANTED.”

“Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 116) is GRANTED. The clerk is DIRECTED to enter judgment in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendants Powhatan Crossing, Inc. and C. Lewis Waltrip, II, jointly and severally, in the amount of $864,536.16, plus interest at the contract rate of five percent from September 25, 2020.”

“For the foregoing reasons, Pankoke's Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF NO. 15) is GRANTED IN PART solely as to Bromwell's claim for relief under Section 1983 for an alleged violation of her rights under the 14th Amendment. The Motion is otherwise DENIED.”

“For the foregoing reasons, the court GRANTS Spirit Cruises' Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 9), and the Clerk is DIRECTED to enter judgment in favor of Spirit Cruises.”