Guilford v. Walgreen Co
| Melvin E Guilford |
| Walgreen Co |
| 1:2022cv01323 |
| October 14, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Alabama |
| Corey L Maze |
| P.I.: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 Petition for Removal- Personal Injury |
| Both |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on December 7, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 11 Opposition to re #7 filed by Walgreen Co. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit Exhibit C, #4 Exhibit Exhibit D)(Bonner, Eric) |
Filing 10
TEXT ORDER: The court ORDERS the defendant to respond to plaintiff's motion to remand (doc. #7 ) by December 7, 2022. Plaintiff should file its reply by December 14, 2022. The response and reply are limited to 15 pages and should be double-spaced, 14-point font. Signed by Judge Corey L. Maze on 11/30/2022. (SRD)
|
| Filing 9 NOTICE of Appearance by Eric D Bonner on behalf of Walgreen Co (Bonner, Eric) |
|
Filing 8
SCHEDULING ORDER: Discovery 9/1/2023. Telephone Status Conference set for 9/5/2023 09:30 AM. Dispositive Motions 9/29/2023. Pretrial Conference set for 2/2/2024 10:00 AM (Anniston). Signed by Judge Corey L. Maze on 11/29/2022. (SRD)
|
| Filing 7 MOTION to Remand to State Court by Melvin E Guilford. (Barnes, David) |
|
Filing 6
TEXT ORDER: The court sets a telephone scheduling conference for Tuesday, November 29, 2022 at 11:00 AM. Counsel are to call 877-873-8018 and enter access code 6714714 to participate. Signed by Judge Corey L. Maze on 11/15/2022. (SRD)
|
| Filing 5 REPORT of Rule 26(f) Planning Meeting. (Barnes, David) |
|
Filing 4
INITIAL ORDER GOVERNING ALL FURTHER PROCEEDINGS - with appendices attached. Signed by Judge Corey L. Maze on 10/26/2022. (SRD)
|
| Filing Fee: Filing fee $ 402, receipt_number AALNDC-4190607. related document #1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL by Walgreen Co from St. Clair County Circuit Court, case number 2022-900179., filed by Walgreen Co. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C)(KAM). (Clark, John) |
| Filing fee: $ 402.00, receipt number B-1663 (SRD) |
| Filing 3 NOTICE of Corporate Disclosure by Walgreen Co (KAM) |
| Filing 2 ANSWER to Complaint with Jury Demand by Walgreen Co.(KAM) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL by Walgreen Co from St. Clair County Circuit Court, case number 2022-900179., filed by Walgreen Co. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit C)(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: Guilford v. Walgreen Co | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Melvin E Guilford | |
| Represented By: | David K Barnes |
| Represented By: | David Keith Barnes |
| 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: Walgreen Co | |
| Represented By: | John W Clark, Jr |
| Represented By: | Eric D Bonner |
| 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.
