Edwards v. Norfolk Southern Railway Company Inc
| Surkano Edwards |
| Norfolk Southern Railway Company Inc |
| 2:2019cv02101 |
| December 24, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Alabama |
| John E Ott |
| Civil Rights: Jobs |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 2000 e |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 23, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 10
ORDER that the parties are reminded that this case will be reassigned to a district judge after 3/26/2020 unless they unanimously consent to the jurisdiction of a magistrate judge; Telephone Conference set for 3/11/2020 11:00 AM before Magistrate Judge John E Ott; parties to call as directed; if all parties submit an executed consent before 3/11/2020, the telephone conference will be cancelled. Signed by Magistrate Judge John E Ott on 2/12/2020. (KAM) (KAM, ).
|
|
Filing 9
ORDER regarding compliance with Rule 26; Rule 26 Meeting Report due by 3/18/2020; Signed by Magistrate Judge John E Ott on 2/12/20. (BST, )
|
|
Filing 8
DEFENDANT'S DEFENSES AND ANSWER to #1 Complaint by Norfolk Southern Railway Company Inc.(Turner, Michael)
|
|
Filing 7
TEXT ORDER granting #6 Motion for Extension of Time to Answer. Norfolk Southern Railway Company Inc answer due 2/10/2020. Signed by Magistrate Judge John E. Ott on 01/22/2020. (SUH)
|
|
Filing 6
Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer Motion is RIPE 1/21/2020. Any party may file a motion to reconsider within three (3) business days of a ruling on the motion.Filed by Norfolk Southern Railway Company Inc. (Turner, Michael)
|
|
Filing 5
SUMMONS Returned Executed by Surkano Edwards. Norfolk Southern Railway Company Inc served on 1/6/2020, answer due 1/27/2020. (KAM)
|
|
Filing 4
Summons Issued as to Norfolk Southern Railway Company Inc. mailed certified mail (KAM)
|
|
Filing Fee: Filing fee $ 400, receipt_number 1126-3504413. related document #1 COMPLAINT against Norfolk Southern Railway Company Inc, filed by Surkano Edwards. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B)(KAM). (Fonteneau, Kira)
|
|
Filing 3
NOTICE of Corporate Disclosure by Surkano Edwards (KAM)
|
|
Filing 2
Request for service by certified mail filed by Surkano Edwards. (KAM)
|
|
Filing 1
COMPLAINT against Norfolk Southern Railway Company Inc, filed by Surkano Edwards. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B)(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: Edwards v. Norfolk Southern Railway Company Inc | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant: Norfolk Southern Railway Company Inc | |
| Represented By: | Crawford S McGivaren, Jr |
| Represented By: | Sydney F Frazier, Jr |
| Represented By: | Michael E Turner |
| 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: Surkano Edwards | |
| Represented By: | Kira Y Fonteneau |
| 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.
