College v. Indian Harbor Insurance Company
| Joseph William Mathews, Jr., Judson College, Joan Vignes Newman, Judith Karen Favor, Daphne Rudicell Robinson and Bill |
| Indian Harbor Insurance Company, ken Goforth and USI Insurance Services |
| 2:2023cv00315 |
| August 21, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Alabama |
| P Bradley Murray |
| Insurance |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity Action |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 28, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 13
ENDORSED ORDER granting #11 the parties' Joint Motion to Stay Proceedings for the reasons set forth in their motion. If the settlement is not completed and a joint stipulation of dismissal is not filed by March, 29, 2024, the parties are ORDERED to file a status report apprising the Court of the status of the case. Signed by Magistrate Judge P. Bradley Murray on 9/28/23. (lto)
|
| Filing 12 ANSWER to Complaint Indian Harbor Insurance Company's Answer to Plaintiffs' Complaint by Indian Harbor Insurance Company. (Gamble, William) |
| Filing 11 Unopposed MOTION to Stay (Jointly submitted by All Parties) filed by All Plaintiffs. (Smith, Richard) |
|
Filing 10
ENDORSED ORDER granting #9 Defendants USI Insurance Services, LLC's and Ken Goforth's Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to Answer or Otherwise Respond to Plaintiffs' Complaint in View of Settlement. The answer/response to Plaintiffs' complaint is due from Ken Goforth and USI Insurance Services on 9/27/2023. Signed by Magistrate Judge P. Bradley Murray on 8/29/23. (lto)
|
| Filing 9 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer or Otherwise Respond to Plaintiffs' Complaint in View of Settlement filed by Ken Goforth, USI Insurance Services. (McDowell, David) |
|
Filing 8
ENDORSED ORDER granting #6 Defendant Indian Harbor Insurance Company's Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to Answer or Otherwise Respond to Plaintiffs' Complaint in View of Settlement. Defendant Indian Harbor Insurance Company's answer/response to Plaintiffs' complaint is due on or before 9/27/2023. Signed by Magistrate Judge P. Bradley Murray on 8/25/23. (lto)
|
| Filing 7 Document endorsed NOTED by Magistrate Judge P. Bradley Murray: A review of the Disclosure Statement #2 filed by Defendant Indian Harbor Insurance Company reveals no reason to believe that there are potential conflicts of interest that would require disqualification or recusal in this action. (lto) |
| Filing 6 Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer re #1 Notice of Removal, Plaintiffs' Complaint filed by Indian Harbor Insurance Company. (Gamble, William) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE of Appearance by David Whittington McDowell on behalf of ken Goforth, USI Insurance Services (McDowell, David) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE of Appearance by Maia Fleischman on behalf of ken Goforth, USI Insurance Services (Fleischman, Maia) |
| Filing 3 Notice of Assignment to Magistrate Judge P. Bradley Murray for trial. (eec) |
| REFERRAL OF #2 Corporate Disclosure Statement to Judge P. Bradley Murray. (eec) |
| Filing 2 Corporate Disclosure Statement filed by Defendant Indian Harbor Insurance Company. (Gamble, William) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL ( Filing fee $ 402, Receipt number AALSDC-3256167, Online Credit Card Payment), filed by Indian Harbor Insurance Company. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit Exhibit C) (Gamble, William) (Additional attachment(s) added on 8/21/2023: #4 Civil Cover Sheet) (fz). |
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 Southern 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
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.
