How should I cite this case?

Cite the full reporter citation and provide a pinpoint page for quoted language. Include the issuing court and decision date so judges and opposing counsel can locate the opinion easily.

Is this opinion binding where I practice?

Binding effect depends on forum: federal district decisions are binding within that court but are persuasive elsewhere. Confirm whether your jurisdiction treats the issuing court's decisions as binding authority.

Can I e-file the opinion as an exhibit?

Yes; courts accept PDF exhibits via ECF when formats meet local rules. Ensure the PDF is complete, searchable, and conforms to the court's electronic filing requirements.

Do I need to check subsequent history?

Always verify subsequent appellate treatment before citing. Negative treatment or reversal can materially alter the opinion's persuasiveness and may require alternative authority.

Can I share the opinion with external parties securely?

Share via secure channels and access-controlled systems. For sensitive matters, use tools that provide encryption in transit (TLS 1.2/1.3) and at rest (AES-256).

Are eSignatures acceptable for internal approvals?

Yes; ESIGN (15 U.S.C. ch. 96) and UETA support electronic signatures for many transactions. For regulated records, verify industry-specific rules—signNow supports compliance standards and offers HIPAA-compliant options with a BAA when required.

Electronic Signature
Templates
Other
Allred v. Bauhaus USA Inc. 243 F. Supp. 2d 583

Allred v. Bauhaus USA Inc. 243 F. Supp. 2d 583

This template is fully customizable. Edit the text, fill out the fields, and send it for signature. Give it a try!

ORDER GRANTING ADDITIONAL TIME TO COMPLETE DISCOVERY

IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL DISTRICT

OF COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI

AND

PLAINTIFFS

VS.

NO.91-69-101 CV

D/B/A

AND

INDIVIDUALLY AND AS AGENT

DEFENDANTS

D/B/A

AND

INDIVIDUALLY AND AS AGENT

THIRD PARTY

PLAINTIFFS

VS.

THIRD PARTY

DEFENDANT

as of in his capacity

County

AGREED ORDER

GRANTING ADDITIONAL TIME

TO COMPLETE DISCOVERY

This cause having come on for hearing this day on the Motion ore tenus of all parties for additional time within which to complete discovery, and the Court being advised that all parties are in agreement that said parties should be granted an additional ninety (90) days from the date of this Order within which to complete discovery in this proceeding;

IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the parties have an additional ninety (90) days from the date of this Order within which to complete discovery in this proceeding.

SO ORDERED AND ADJUDGED this the day of ,

COURT JUDGE

AGREED:

Attorney for Third Party Defendant

Attorney for Defendants and

Third Party Plaintiffs

Attorney for Plaintiffs

What Allred v. Bauhaus USA Inc. 243 F. Supp. 2d 583 is and why it matters

Allred v. Bauhaus USA Inc., 243 F. Supp. 2d 583, is a published federal district court opinion cited by practitioners and researchers. The reported decision sets out reasoning and rulings that are used for legal analysis, citation, and tactical briefing within the issuing court's jurisdiction. Legal teams consult the opinion to identify holdings versus dicta, assess procedural posture, and confirm whether the decision is binding or persuasive for related matters. This page summarizes practical uses, filing considerations, citation etiquette, and eSubmission options.

Why you would consult this opinion

Consulting Allred provides clarity on specific legal issues decided by the court and supplies authoritative language useful in motions and memoranda. It helps attorneys frame arguments, verify applicable procedural steps, and assess whether the opinion provides binding precedent or persuasive authority for other courts.

Who commonly relies on this decision

Practitioners and researchers consult this opinion when preparing briefs, evaluating precedent, and verifying procedural posture before filings.

Federal trial and appellate attorneys for briefing, citing precedent, and appeal strategy.
Paralegals and litigation support staff who prepare records and assemble citation pages for filings.
Law professors and students when analyzing doctrinal developments in civil procedure or substantive law.

The groups below most often use the opinion for legal analysis, citation drafting, and internal case strategy.

Typical users and their objectives

Plaintiff Counsel

Plaintiff counsel uses the opinion to identify language supporting liability elements, to craft targeted motions, and to extract favorable factual distinctions. Counsel should confirm all pin cites and perform a subsequent-history check before relying on the decision.

Defense Counsel

Defense counsel examines the opinion to evaluate exposure, locate procedural defenses, and prepare responsive briefing. Accurate citation, context for any dicta, and review of appellate treatment are necessary for responsible reliance.

Essential case metadata to record

Case Caption: Allred v. Bauhaus USA Inc.

Citation: 243 F. Supp. 2d 583

Court: U.S. District Court, Federal Reporter

Decision Date: Record full date in MM/DD/YYYY format

Docket Number: Enter the court docket number if available

Parties: Plaintiff: Allred; Defendant: Bauhaus USA Inc.

Risks and consequences of misuse

Mis-citation: Incorrect pin cites can mislead the court

Jurisdiction Error: Treating persuasive authority as controlling

Overreliance: Relying on dicta instead of holdings

Outdated Precedent: Failing to confirm subsequent negative treatment

Procedural Mismatch: Applying rule outside proper procedural posture

Incomplete Record: Citing without attaching relevant exhibits

Common pitfalls when using the opinion

Quoting isolated language without context and presenting dicta as holding leads to flawed legal arguments and can undermine credibility with the court.
Failing to check the subsequent history or negative treatment on Shepardizing or KeyCite may result in citing authority that is no longer persuasive.
Submitting a scanned copy with missing pages or redactions can affect the court clerk's ability to accept or docket the filing correctly.
Using inconsistent citation styles or omitting page pinpoints increases friction for judges and opposing counsel reviewing the authority.

Step-by-step: verify and cite the opinion correctly

Follow these steps to verify, cite, and incorporate Allred v. Bauhaus USA Inc. into briefs, filings, and legal memoranda.

01

Locate Opinion: Retrieve the full text from the official reporter or court docket.
02

Read Holdings: Distinguish the holding from dicta and summarize the core rulings.
03

Check History: Confirm appeals, rehearings, or negative treatment before reliance.
04

Pinpoint Cite: Provide precise page and paragraph pin cites for accuracy.

Where to route the opinion and how to file related materials

Routing and submission options for integrating the opinion into briefs, court filings, and client deliverables across electronic and physical channels.

Internal Review: Share an annotated copy with the litigation team.
File with Court: Attach as an exhibit or cite in the memorandum.
Serve Opposing Counsel: Include citation in the service packet or email.
Archive: Store in matter file and document management system.

Field	Configuration
Document Source	Court Docket \| PACER PDF
Citation Format	Bluebook \| Pin cites included
Distribution	Email \| ECF upload
Retention	Case Folder \| Follow retention policy

Platform capabilities to support eSubmission and secure recordkeeping

Ensure the chosen platform supports PDF and DOCX court formats, provides secure transmission, and integrates with case management systems for efficient eSubmission.

Formats Supported: PDF, DOCX, HTML and Excel
Integrations: Salesforce, Microsoft 365, NetSuite
Security Standards: TLS 1.2/1.3; AES-256 at rest

Key timing considerations when relying on the opinion

Important procedural timelines to observe after a district-court decision, including appeal windows, post-judgment motions, and record retention obligations.

Notice of Appeal Deadline:

30 days from entry of judgment per Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A).

Motion to Alter Judgment:

File within 28 days under Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e).

Motion for Relief from Judgment:

Rule 60(b) motions require reasonable timing; some grounds have a one-year limit.

Citation Updates:

Update briefs promptly if subsequent history changes precedential value.

Record Retention:

Retain litigation files through appeal and required statutory periods.

eSignature vendor pricing and capability snapshot

Quick vendor pricing and capability comparison focused on starting price, trial availability, bulk send, audit trail, HIPAA compliance, and envelope caps.

	signNow	DocuSign	Adobe Sign	PandaDoc	HelloSign
Starting Price	$8/user/mo	$15/user/mo	$14/user/mo	$19/user/mo	$15/user/mo
Free Trial	7-day free trial, no credit card	No	No	No	No
Bulk Send	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No
Audit Trail	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
HIPAA Compliant	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	No
Envelope Cap	No cap	100 envelopes/user/year	Varies by plan	Varies by plan	Varies by plan

Practical examples of using the opinion in real workflows

These examples illustrate how litigation teams and educators employ the opinion to support filings, classroom analysis, and precedent mapping.

Litigation Brief Support

A trial team extracts the court's holding and related fact patterns to frame a motion in limine.

The brief cites specific pinpoints to support legal elements.
The final memorandum includes subsequent-history verification and an exhibit with the full opinion to provide the judge full context and minimize surprises at the hearing.

Classroom Analysis

A law professor assigns the opinion to illustrate doctrine and procedural posture.

Students analyze holdings and separate dicta.
The assignment requires students to Shepardize the case, prepare a short brief comparing the opinion to later appellate treatment, and discuss implications for similar fact patterns.

Best practices for accurate and efficient use

Adopt consistent processes to verify, cite, and file the opinion across matter teams to reduce errors and preserve appellate options.

Confirm Subsequent History

Always run a subsequent-history check (Shepardize/KeyCite) before filing to identify overruling, negative treatment, or appellate disposition that affects reliance.

Use Exact Pinpoints

Cite reporter page and paragraph pinpoints for each quoted passage to reduce transcription errors and facilitate judicial review.

Preserve the Record

Attach relevant exhibits and ensure the official docket entry or certified copy is accessible in the event of appeals or motions to supplement the record.

Follow Style Guides

Apply the Bluebook or local citation rules consistently, and include jurisdictional weight when describing the authority's precedential effect.

Frequently asked questions about using the opinion

Answers to common questions on citation, authority, eSubmission, and authenticity when relying on Allred v. Bauhaus USA Inc.

Need help? Contact support

How should I cite this case?
Cite the full reporter citation and provide a pinpoint page for quoted language. Include the issuing court and decision date so judges and opposing counsel can locate the opinion easily.
Is this opinion binding where I practice?
Binding effect depends on forum: federal district decisions are binding within that court but are persuasive elsewhere. Confirm whether your jurisdiction treats the issuing court's decisions as binding authority.
Can I e-file the opinion as an exhibit?
Yes; courts accept PDF exhibits via ECF when formats meet local rules. Ensure the PDF is complete, searchable, and conforms to the court's electronic filing requirements.
Do I need to check subsequent history?
Always verify subsequent appellate treatment before citing. Negative treatment or reversal can materially alter the opinion's persuasiveness and may require alternative authority.
Can I share the opinion with external parties securely?
Share via secure channels and access-controlled systems. For sensitive matters, use tools that provide encryption in transit (TLS 1.2/1.3) and at rest (AES-256).
Are eSignatures acceptable for internal approvals?
Yes; ESIGN (15 U.S.C. ch. 96) and UETA support electronic signatures for many transactions. For regulated records, verify industry-specific rules—signNow supports compliance standards and offers HIPAA-compliant options with a BAA when required.

Explore Templates

Michigan Notice of Judgment Lien Michigan Courts Forfeiture Form DC 54 Appeal Worksheet Waiver of Disqualification Request and Notice for Film and Electronic Media Coverage Mediation Status Report

be ready to get more

Join over 28 million airSlate SignNow users

Sign Now