Ford v. Cano et al
Plaintiff: Jourdyn K Ford
Defendant: Rudolph John Cano, III and Unknown Howard
Case Number: 2:2019cv00876
Filed: February 11, 2019
Court: US District Court for the District of Arizona
Presiding Judge: John Z Boyle (PS)
Referring Judge: Steven P Logan
Nature of Suit: Prisoner: Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441
Jury Demanded By: Both
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on March 14, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
March 14, 2019 Filing 6 NOTICE re: Acknowldegment of Receipt of Remand Letter from Maricopa County Superior Court. (MSA)
March 7, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 5 ORDER - This matter is remanded to the Superior Court of Maricopa County, Arizona. The Clerk shall mail a certified copy of this Order to the Clerk of the Superior Court and this federal case must close. Signed by Judge Steven P Logan on 3/7/19. (DXD)
February 15, 2019 Filing 4 MINUTE ORDER: The Court's Notice #3 subjecting this case to the Mandatory Initial Discovery Pilot (MIDP) program is VACATED. This case will not be subject to the MIDP Pilot program requirements. This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no PDF document associated with this entry. (BAR)
February 11, 2019 Filing 3 NOTICE TO THE PARTIES - The Court is participating in the Mandatory Initial Discovery Pilot (MIDP) and this case is subject to that pilot. The key features and deadlines are set forth in the attached Notice which includes General Order 17-08. Also attached is a checklist for use by the parties. All parties must respond to the mandatory initial discovery requests set forth in the General Order before initiating any further discovery in this case. Please note: The discovery obligations in the General Order supersede the disclosures required by Rule 26(a)(1). Any party seeking affirmative relief must serve a copy of the attached documents (Notice to Parties, including General Order 17-08 and MIDP Checklist) on each new party when the Complaint, Counterclaim, Crossclaim, or Third-Party Complaint is served. (BAR)
February 11, 2019 Filing 2 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT (BAR)
February 11, 2019 Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Maricopa County Superior Court, case number CV2018-014612. Filing fee received: $ 400.00, receipt number 0970-16519694 filed by Unknown Howard. (Zawislak, Gosia) (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Supplemental Civil Cover Sheet, #3 Exhibit)(BAR) Modified on 2/14/2019, to remove Defendant Cano from text (BAR).

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 Arizona District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Ford v. Cano et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Jourdyn K Ford
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: Rudolph John Cano, III
Represented By: Gosia Monika Zawislak
Represented By: Maxine S Mak
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: Unknown Howard
Represented By: Gosia Monika Zawislak
Represented By: Maxine S Mak
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?