Steffen v. Union Pacific Railroad Company et al
| Katie M. Steffen |
| Union Pacific Railroad Company and Brian L. Kline |
| 2:2015cv01025 |
| May 11, 2015 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Sacramento Office |
| Yolo |
| Kendall J. Newman |
| Troy L. Nunley |
| Motor Vehicle |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 |
| Defendant |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
39
STIPULATION and ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 4/26/2017 ORDERING that this case is REMANDED to Yolo County Superior Court. Copy of remand order sent to other court. CASE CLOSED. (Zignago, K.)
|
|
Filing
33
STIPULATION and ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 3/7/17: Plaintiff is granted leave to file the Second Amended Complaint, which is to be filed with the Court within ten (10) days of this signed Order. (Kaminski, H)
|
|
Filing
27
STIPULATION and ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 2/8/17 ORDERING that Defendant TIM PAXIN's PACIFIC EXCAVATION, INC. erroneously sued as PACIFIC EXCAVATION, INC.'s deadline to respond to Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint is 2/27/2017. (Mena-Sanchez, L)
|
|
Filing
16
STIPULATION and ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 1/5/17: Plaintiff is granted leave to file the First Amended Complaint, which is to be filed within fourteen (14) days of this Order. (Kaminski, H)
|
|
Filing
10
STIPULATION AND ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 3/23/16 ORDERING the date for completion of discovery, with the exception of expert discovery, is reset to 9/30/16. The expert disclosure deadline is reset to 11/28/16. The exchange of lists of rebuttal expert witnesses is currently set for 20 days after 8/26/16 or 9/14/16. The parties request an extension of this deadline to 20 days following the proposed new deadline of 11/28/16 for expert disclosure - or 12/15/16. Coun sel was instructed to complete all discovery of expert witnesses in a timely manner in order to comply with the Court's deadline for filing dispositive motions. As a dispositive motion is not appropriate in this case, the parties request an extension of the expert witness discovery completion date for 75 days after the rebuttal disclosure or 2/28/17. All other dates will remain the same as provided for in the 7/22/15 Pretrial Scheduling Order.(Becknal, R)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the California Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
