Allman v. Walgreens Co.
||Heather M. Allman
||July 21, 2009
||Missouri Eastern District Court
||St. Louis Office
||St. Louis - County
||David D. Noce
|Nature of Suit:
|Cause of Action:
||28:1331 Fed. Question: Personal Injury
|Jury Demanded By:
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|Date Filed||#||Document Text|
|March 18, 2010
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the parties shall appear before the court on Friday, April 2, 2010, at 10:00 a.m., to determine whether Allmon has satisfied the requirements of diversity of citizenship subject matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a). IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all pending motions are deferred until the court is satisfied that it possesses subject matter jurisdiction over the case. Signed by Magistrate Judge David D. Noce on 3/18/10. (KXS)
|April 5, 2010
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that James Holloran, Esq., 2000 South Eighth St., St. Louis, Missouri 63104, is appointed to represent plaintiff in this action under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e) and the inherent authority of the court. See E.D. Mo. Local Rule 12.03 Attorney Admission Fee Non- Appropriated Fund and the regulations adopted by the court thereunder. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiffs counsel shall have until not later than May 7, 2010 to file a supplemental memorandum regarding the pending matters. Counsel for defendant shall have 14 days thereafter to file a response. Response to Court due by 5/7/2010.. Signed by Magistrate Judge David D. Noce on 4/5/2010. (KMS)
Access additional case information on PACER
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 Missouri Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets were retrieved from PACER, and should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.