Erlichman v. Haas et al
| Dave Erlichman |
| James J Haas, Maricopa, County of, Diane J Terribile, William Gates and Nicholas Lubchenco |
| 2:2020cv00074 |
| January 10, 2020 |
| US District Court for the District of Arizona |
| Deborah M Fine |
| Douglas L Rayes |
| Civil Rights: Jobs |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 |
| Defendant |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 2, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 14 NOTICE of Service of Discovery filed by Dave Erlichman. (Foster, Troy) |
| Filing 13 NOTICE of Service of Responses to Mandatory Initial Discovery (MIDP) filed by Defendants James J Haas, Nicholas Lubchenco, Maricopa, County of. (Baker, Katherine) |
| Filing 12 NOTICE of Service of Responses to Mandatory Initial Discovery (MIDP) filed by Plaintiff Dave Erlichman. (Foster, Troy) |
Filing 11
ORDER pursuant to #10 Stipulation of Dismissal of Gates and Terribile Defendants with prejudice and to Withdraw Defendants' Motion to Dismiss as Moot: Plaintiff's Complaint is hereby dismissed with prejudice as against defendants Gates and Terribile only, and Defendants' Motion to Dismiss is withdrawn as moot. Signed by Judge Douglas L Rayes on 2/5/2020. (MMO)
|
| Filing 10 STIPULATION of Dismissal w/Prejudice of Defendants Gates and Terribile by William Gates, James J Haas, Nicholas Lubchenco, Maricopa, County of, Diane J Terribile. (Attachments: #1 order)(Baker, Katherine) |
|
Filing 9
ORDER SETTING RULE 16 SCHEDULING CONFERENCE: Rule 16 Scheduling Conference set for 3/27/2020 at 04:30 PM in Courtroom 606, 401 West Washington Street, Phoenix, AZ 85003 before Judge Douglas L Rayes. The parties are directed to meet and confer at least 14 days before the Scheduling Conference as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f). (See Order for details.) Signed by Judge Douglas L Rayes on 1/16/2020. (MMO)
|
|
Filing 8
ORDER that motions pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b) are discouraged if the defect can be cured by filing an amended pleading. The parties must meet and confer prior to the filing of such motions to determine whether it can be avoided. FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff(s) serve a copy of this Order upon Defendant(s) and file a notice of service. See attached Order for complete details. Signed by Judge Douglas L Rayes on 1/16/2020. (MMO)
|
| Filing 7 MINUTE ORDER: Pursuant to Local Rule 3.7(b), a request has been received for a random reassignment of this case to a District Judge. FURTHER ORDERED Case reassigned by random draw to Judge Douglas L Rayes. All further pleadings/papers should now list the following COMPLETE case number: CV-20-74-PHX-DLR. This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no PDF document associated with this entry. (MAP) |
| Filing 6 Party Elects Assignment of Case to District Judge Jurisdiction. This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no PDF document associated with this entry. (MAP) |
| Filing 4 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. (BAC) |
| Filing 3 ***STATE COURT RECORD RECEIVED: ANSWER to complaint with Jury Demand by William Gates, James J Haas, Nicholas Lubchenco, Maricopa, County of, Diane J Terribile. (original filed in Maricopa County Superior Court on 1/2/20). ENTERED IN DISTRICT COURT FOR CASE MANAGEMENT PURPOSES***(BAC) |
| Filing 2 Filing fee paid, receipt number 0970-17825166. This case has been assigned to the Honorable Deborah M Fine. All future pleadings or documents should bear the correct case number: CV-20-00074-PHX-DMF. Magistrate Election form attached. PLEASE NOTE: Plaintiff(s) and defendants that have already appeared in this case are required to file the attached Magistrate Election form within FOURTEEN (14) days of this filing. Please read attached instructions.(BAC) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Maricopa County Superior Court, case number CV2019-015313. Filing fee received: $400.00, receipt number 0970-17825166 filed by Diane J Terribile, Maricopa, County of, William Gates, James J Haas, Nicholas Lubchenco. (Baker, Katherine) (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Supplemental civil cover sheet, #3 Affidavit Verification of documents, #4 Exhibit State Court Documents)(BAC) |
| ***STATE COURT RECORDS RECEIVED***SERVICE EXECUTED: Affidavit of Service re: Civil Cover Sheet, Summons, Complaint and Certificate of Compulsory Arbitration upon Diane J Terribile, Nicholas Lubchenco and James J Haas on 12/13/19(original filed in Maricopa County Superior Court on 1/2/20). Affidavit of Service re: Civil Cover Sheet, Summons, Complaint and Certificate of Compulsory Arbitration upon William Gates, on 12/16/19 (original filed in Maricopa County Superior Court on 1/2/20). (BAC) This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no PDF document associated with this entry. |
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 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.
