SC America LLC v. Marcos Franchising LLC
| SC America LLC |
| Marcos Franchising LLC |
| 1:2022cv00610 |
| May 11, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Alabama |
| R David Proctor |
| Contract: Franchise |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 Petition for Removal |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on June 2, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 12
First MOTION to Alter Judgment And Dismiss by SC America LLC. (May, Edward)
|
|
Filing 11
ORDER - This case is before the court on the parties' briefs in support of their respective positions on whether the court should transfer this case to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio. (Docs. #6 , #9 ). For the reasons provided in the contemporaneously filed memorandum opinion, the court concludes that this case is due to be and hereby is TRANSFERRED to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio pursuant to the parties' forum-selection clause. Signed by Judge R David Proctor on 6/1/2022. (KEK)
|
|
Filing 10
MEMORANDUM OPINION - This case is before the court on the parties' briefs in support of their respective positions on whether the court should transfer this case to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio. (Docs. #6 , #9 ). For the reasons explained above, Marco's motion to transfer to the proper venue is due to be granted. A separate order in accordance with this memorandum opinion will be entered contemporaneously. Signed by Judge R David Proctor on 6/1/2022. (KEK)
|
|
Filing 9
Brief Marco's Brief in Support of Transfer Based on the Mandatory Forum-Selection Clause. (Richter, Jeremy)
|
|
Filing 8
ORDER for the reasons provided in the contemporaneously filed memorandum opinion, the court concludes sua sponte that subject matter jurisdiction exists in this case and, therefore, removal is proper; The court ORDERS the parties to file simultaneous briefing regarding the proper venue for this case and any other issues that the parties wish the court to consider on or by Friday, May 27, 2022. Parties SHALL submit simultaneous responsive briefs on or by Friday, June 3, 2022. Signed by Judge R David Proctor on 5/19/2022. (KAM)
|
|
Filing 7
MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge R David Proctor on 5/19/2022. (KAM)
|
|
Filing Fee: Filing fee $ 402, receipt_number AALNDC-4089987. related document #1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL by Marcos Franchising LLC from Calhoun County Circuit Court, case number 2022-900192. (), filed by Marcos Franchising LLC. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 2)(KAM). (Richter, Jeremy) NDAL rec# B46011120357 (KAM).
|
|
Filing 6
STATUS REPORT by Marcos Franchising LLC. filed by Marcos Franchising LLC (Richter, Jeremy)
|
|
Filing 5
TEXT ORDER The court held a status conference in this action on May 13, 2022. In accordance with the courts instructions in the conference, the parties SHALL meet and confer and file a joint report on or before May 16, 2022, providing a proposed plan for the next steps of this case. The joint report SHALL include the parties position on (1) remand, (2) the forum selection clause, (3) extension of the temporary restraining order issued in state court, and (4) any other matter the parties deem necessary for the court to address. Signed by Judge R David Proctor on 5/13/2022. (KAM)
|
|
Filing 4
ORDER #3 Motion for Leave to Appear PHV of Anne P. Caiola is GRANTED. Signed by Judge R David Proctor on 5/13/2022. (KAM)
|
|
Filing 3
MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Marcos Franchising LLC. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit EXHIBIT 1)(Eason, Leslie)
|
|
Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge R David Proctor: Status Conference held on 5/13/2022. As discussed, the parties shall submit a joint report by 5/16/2022. (Court Reporter Risa Entrekin.) (KLL)
|
|
PHV Fee paid: $ 75, receipt number AALNDC-4085608. (Eason, Leslie) NDAL rec # B4601120254 Modified on 5/18/2022 (KAM).
|
|
Filing 2
TEXT ORDER This case is before the court on Defendants Notice of Removal #1 . This case is SET for a status conference in chambers on Friday, May 13, 2022 at 1:00 p.m. before Judge R David Proctor. A court reporter will be present. Signed by Judge R David Proctor on 5/12/2022. (KAM)
|
|
Filing 1
NOTICE OF REMOVAL by Marcos Franchising LLC from Calhoun County Circuit Court, case number 2022-900192. (), filed by Marcos Franchising LLC. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1, #2 Exhibit 2)(KAM)
|
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 Alabama Northern 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
| Search for this case: SC America LLC v. Marcos Franchising LLC | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: SC America LLC | |
| Represented By: | Edward E May, II |
| Represented By: | Edward Eugene May, II |
| 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 ] |
| Defendant: Marcos Franchising LLC | |
| Represented By: | Jeremy W Richter |
| Represented By: | Leslie K Eason |
| Represented By: | Anne Pierce Caiola |
| 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.
