Edwards v. Norfolk Southern Railway Company Inc
Plaintiff: Surkano Edwards
Defendant: Norfolk Southern Railway Company Inc
Case Number: 2:2019cv02101
Filed: December 24, 2019
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of Alabama
Presiding Judge: John E Ott
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Jobs
Cause of Action: 42:2000e
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on February 12, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
February 12, 2020 Opinion or Order 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, ).
February 12, 2020 Opinion or Order 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, )
February 10, 2020 Filing 8 DEFENDANT'S DEFENSES AND ANSWER to #1 Complaint by Norfolk Southern Railway Company Inc.(Turner, Michael)
January 22, 2020 Opinion or Order 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)
January 21, 2020 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)
January 8, 2020 Filing 5 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Surkano Edwards. Norfolk Southern Railway Company Inc served on 1/6/2020, answer due 1/27/2020. (KAM)
January 2, 2020 Filing 4 Summons Issued as to Norfolk Southern Railway Company Inc. mailed certified mail (KAM)
December 29, 2019 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)
December 24, 2019 Filing 3 NOTICE of Corporate Disclosure by Surkano Edwards (KAM)
December 24, 2019 Filing 2 Request for service by certified mail filed by Surkano Edwards. (KAM)
December 24, 2019 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 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.


Why Is My Information Online?