Harter v. Big Lots Stores, Inc.

Harter v. Big Lots Stores, Inc.

Plaintiff:	Darlene Harter
Defendant:	Big Lots Stores, Inc.
Case Number:	4:2014cv01067
Filed:	June 9, 2014
Court:	US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri
Office:	St. Louis Office
County:	St. Francois
Presiding Judge:	Jean C. Hamilton
Nature of Suit:	Other Personal Injury
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 1332
Jury Demanded By:	Defendant

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
October 27, 2014	Filing 15 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER re: 13 ORDERED that Plaintiff Darlene Harter's Amended Complaint, (ECF No. 11), and Defendant Big Lots Stores, Inc.'s Answer to the Amended Complaint, (ECF No. 12), are STRICKEN. FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant Better P roperty, LLC is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. FURTHER ORDERED that Harter has 7 DAYS from the date of this Order to file a motion for leave to amend her Petition if she wishes to amend it. Any such motion must discuss the propriety of joining any pot ential party sought to be joined and include factual allegations relevant to the citizenship of Harter, Big Lots, and any potential party sought to be joined. Big Lots will then have 7 DAYS from the filing of any such motion to file a response, and H arter will have 7 DAYS from the filing of any response to file a reply. FINALLY ORDERED that Harter's Motion to Remand to State Court, (ECF No. 13), is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. ( Response to Court due by 11/3/2014.). Signed by District Judge Jean C. Hamilton on 10/27/14. (CEL)

Date Filed

Document Text

October 27, 2014

Filing 15 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER re: 13 ORDERED that Plaintiff Darlene Harter's Amended Complaint, (ECF No. 11), and Defendant Big Lots Stores, Inc.'s Answer to the Amended Complaint, (ECF No. 12), are STRICKEN. FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant Better P roperty, LLC is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. FURTHER ORDERED that Harter has 7 DAYS from the date of this Order to file a motion for leave to amend her Petition if she wishes to amend it. Any such motion must discuss the propriety of joining any pot ential party sought to be joined and include factual allegations relevant to the citizenship of Harter, Big Lots, and any potential party sought to be joined. Big Lots will then have 7 DAYS from the filing of any such motion to file a response, and H arter will have 7 DAYS from the filing of any response to file a reply. FINALLY ORDERED that Harter's Motion to Remand to State Court, (ECF No. 13), is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. ( Response to Court due by 11/3/2014.). Signed by District Judge Jean C. Hamilton on 10/27/14. (CEL)

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

Search for this case: Harter v. Big Lots Stores, Inc.
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Defendant: Big Lots Stores, Inc.
Represented By:	Joseph R. Swift
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: Darlene Harter
Represented By:	Joseph L. Goff, Sr.
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]

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.

Why Is My Information Online?