Madkin v. Automation Personnel Services Inc
Plaintiff: Teresa Madkin
Defendant: Automation Personnel Services Inc
Case Number: 2:2021cv01177
Filed: August 26, 2021
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of Alabama
Presiding Judge: Staci G Cornelius
Referring Judge: Corey L Maze
Nature of Suit: Other Fraud
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1442
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on October 18, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
October 18, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 19 TEXT ORDER GRANTING #11 Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice. Signed by Judge Corey L Maze on 10/18/2021. (KEK)
October 14, 2021 Filing 18 AMENDED COMPLAINT against Automation Personnel Services Inc, filed by Teresa Madkin.(Rouco, Richard)
October 14, 2021 PHV Fee paid: $ 75, receipt number 1126-3943324. (Dodson, John)
October 13, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 17 TEXT ORDER: Per Doc. 16 , Doc. #6 Motion to Dismiss is DENIED as moot. The plaintiff is DIRECTED to file her amended complaint as a new docket entry. Signed by Judge Corey L Maze on 10/13/2021. (KEK)
October 13, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 16 TEXT ORDER GRANTING #12 Unopposed Motion to Amend/Correct Complaint by Teresa Madkin. Signed by Judge Corey L Maze on 10/13/2021. (KEK)
October 12, 2021 Filing 15 NOTICE of Appearance by Eric J Artrip on behalf of Teresa Madkin (Artrip, Eric)
October 12, 2021 Filing 14 RESPONSE in Opposition re #6 MOTION to Dismiss filed by Teresa Madkin. (Mastando, Teresa)
October 12, 2021 Filing 13 NOTICE of Appearance by Teresa Ryder Mastando on behalf of Teresa Madkin (Mastando, Teresa)
October 12, 2021 Filing 12 Unopposed MOTION to Amend/Correct Complaint by Teresa Madkin. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit First Amended Complaint)(Rouco, Richard)
October 7, 2021 Filing 11 MOTION for Leave to Appear PRO HAC VICE by Automation Personnel Services Inc. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit CERTIFICATE OF GOOD STANDING)(Dodson, John)
September 17, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 10 TEXT ORDER GRANTING #9 the plaintiff's unopposed motion to extend the deadline to respond to the defendant's motion to dismiss until October 10, 2021. Signed by Judge Corey L Maze on 9/17/2021. (KEK)
September 16, 2021 Filing 9 Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time by Teresa Madkin. (Rouco, Richard)
September 9, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 8 TEXT ORDER Plaintiff shall have until Thursday, September 23, 2021 to respond to Defendant Automation Personnel Services Inc.'s motion to dismiss #6 . Plaintiff's brief shall not exceed 25 pages, double-spaced, 14-point font. Defendant Automation Personnel Services Inc. may file a reply brief by September 30, 2021, which shall not exceed 10 pages, double-spaced, 14-point font. Signed by Judge Corey L Maze on 9/9/2021. (KEK)
September 9, 2021 Set/Reset Deadlines as to #6 MOTION to Dismiss . Responses due by 9/23/2021; Replies due by 9/30/2021. (KEK)
September 1, 2021 Filing 7 Brief re #6 MOTION to Dismiss filed by Automation Personnel Services Inc. (Crunk, Michelle)
September 1, 2021 Filing 6 MOTION to Dismiss by Automation Personnel Services Inc. (Crunk, Michelle)
September 1, 2021 Filing 5 NOTICE of Appearance by Michelle L Crunk on behalf of Automation Personnel Services Inc (Crunk, Michelle)
September 1, 2021 Filing 4 Notice of Reassignment- Because the parties have not unanimously consented to the dispositive jurisdiction by a Magistrate Judge, the above styled civil action has been randomly reassigned to the Honorable Corey L Maze. Please use case number 2:21-cv-1177-CLM on all subsequent pleadings. Magistrate Judge Staci G Cornelius no longer assigned to the case. (MRR, )
August 27, 2021 Filing 3 Corporate Disclosure Statement by Automation Personnel Services Inc. filed by Automation Personnel Services Inc (Dodson, John)
August 26, 2021 Filing 2 NOTICE REGARDING CONSENT to magistrate judge jurisdiction (MRR, )
August 26, 2021 Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Circuit Court of Jefferson County, case number 01-cv-2021-902134., filed by Automation Personnel Services Inc. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit C)(MRR, )
August 26, 2021 CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT against Automation Personnel Services Inc, filed by Teresa Madkin.-Deemed filed 7/26/21 (Doc 1-1 p.8 of combined pdf, Doc 1-3 p. 27 of combined pdf)(MRR, )
August 26, 2021 Filing Fee: Filing fee $ 402, receipt_number 1126-3913468 (B4601115446). related document #1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Circuit Court of Jefferson County, case number 01-cv-2021-902134., filed by Automation Personnel Services Inc. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C)(MRR, ). (Dodson, John) Modified on 8/27/2021 (MRR, ).

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: Madkin v. Automation Personnel Services Inc
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Teresa Madkin
Represented By: Richard P Rouco
Represented By: Eric J Artrip
Represented By: Teresa Ryder Mastando
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: Automation Personnel Services Inc
Represented By: John W Dodson
Represented By: Claudia Drennen McCarron
Represented By: Michelle L Crunk
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?