Davis v. Glendale, City of et al
| Joseph Davis |
| Glendale, City of and Unknown Parties |
| 2:2023cv00016 |
| January 4, 2023 |
| US District Court for the District of Arizona |
| Dominic W Lanza |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 Petition for Removal- Wrongful Death |
| Defendant |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on August 18, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 9 REPLY re: #8 Response in Opposition to Motion, #7 MOTION to Dismiss Counts/Claims : I & II Defendant's Response to Plaintiff's Motion to Allow Discovery Prior to Filing Response and Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Counts 1 and 2 by Defendant Glendale, City of. (Acedo, Nicholas) |
| Filing 8 RESPONSE in Opposition re: #7 MOTION to Dismiss Counts/Claims : I & II, MOTION to Allow Discovery filed by Joseph Davis. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1 - Declaration)(Halverson, J) Modified to reflect Motion text on 1/31/2023 (WLP). |
| Filing 7 MOTION to Dismiss Counts/Claims : I & II by Glendale, City of. (Attachments: #1 Attachment)(Acedo, Nicholas) |
Filing 6
PRELIMINARY ORDER: IT IS ORDERED: 1. That Plaintiff(s) must promptly serve a copy of this Order on Defendant(s) and file a notice of service with the Clerk of Court; 2. That, unless the Court orders otherwise, on April 5, 2023, the Clerk of Court shall terminate without further notice any Defendant in this action that has not been served pursuant to Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure [see attached Order for details]. Signed by Judge Dominic W Lanza on 1/5/23. (MAW)
|
| Filing 5 NOTICE by Glendale, City of Notice of Pending Motion. (Acedo, Nicholas) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE TO FILER OF DEFICIENCY re: #1 Notice of Removal filed by Glendale, City of. Document not in compliance with LRCiv 7.1(a)(3) - Party names must be capitalized using proper upper and lower case type. No further action is required. This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no PDF document associated with this entry. (ARC) |
| Filing 3 NOTICE TO FILER OF DEFICIENCY re: #1 Notice of Removal filed by Glendale, City of. Document not in compliance with LRCiv 3.6(d). FOLLOW-UP ACTION REQUIRED: Please file a "Notice" of Pending Motion. Deficiency must be corrected within one business day of this notice. This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no PDF document associated with this entry. (ARC) |
| Filing 2 Filing fee paid, receipt number AAZDC-21459591. This case has been assigned to the Honorable Dominic W Lanza. All future pleadings or documents should bear the correct case number: CV-23-16-PHX-DWL. Notice of Availability of Magistrate Judge to Exercise Jurisdiction form attached. (ARC) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Maricopa County Superior Court, case number CV2022-005818. Filing fee received: $ 402.00, receipt number AAZDC-21459591 filed by Glendale, City of. (Acedo, Nicholas) (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Exhibit 1- Supplemental Civil Cover Sheet, #3 Exhibit 2, #4 Exhibit 3, #5 Exhibit 4, #6 Exhibit 5, #7 Exhibit 6, #8 Exhibit 7, #9 Exhibit 8)(ARC) |
| ***STATE COURT RECORDS RECEIVED*** SERVICE EXECUTED : Affidavit of Service re: Summons, Complaint, Certificate of Compulsory Arbitration upon Glendale, City of on 8/1/2022. (Original filed in Maricopa County Superior Court on 8/9/2022) (ARC) This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no PDF document associated with this entry. |
| ***STATE COURT RECORDS RECEIVED: ANSWER to Complaint with Jury Demand by Glendale, City of. ENTERED IN DISTRICT COURT FOR CASE MANAGEMENT PURPOSES***(ARC) |
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.
