Colter v. Marquez

Plaintiff: Roman Colter
Defendant: Rosemary Marquez
Case Number: 4:2018cv00385
Filed: August 7, 2018
Court: US District Court for the District of Arizona
Office: Tucson Division Office
County: Pima
Presiding Judge: Leslie A Bowman
Nature of Suit: Other Fraud
Cause of Action: 28:1442
Jury Demanded By: None

Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on September 4, 2018. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
September 4, 2018 Filing 10 MOTION for Removal Back to State Court by Roman Colter. (SIB)
August 17, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 8 ORDER: IT IS ORDERED that this case is transferred to the Phoenix Division and randomly reassigned to Judge John J. Tuchi. All future filings shall reflect the following case number: CV-18-2599-PHX-JJT. Signed by Chief Judge Raner C Collins on 8/17/18.(BAC)
August 15, 2018 Filing 7 Agreement to Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction. Party agrees to Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction. This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no PDF document associated with this entry. (BAC)
August 14, 2018 Filing 5 MOTION to Dismiss Case With Prejudice by Rosemary Marquez. (Hurley, Emory)
August 7, 2018 Filing 4 NOTICE TO SELF-REPRESENTED LITIGANT re informational documents attached: (1) Notice to Self-Represented Litigant, (2) Federal Court Self-Service Clinic Flyer, (3) Fed. R. Civ. P. 5.2, and (4) Notice and Request re Electronic Noticing. (BAR)
August 7, 2018 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)
August 7, 2018 Filing 2 This case has been assigned to the Honorable Leslie A Bowman. All future pleadings or documents should bear the correct case number: CV 18-00385-TUC-LAB. 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. (BAR)
August 7, 2018 Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Pima County Superior Court, case number C20183379 filed by Rosemary Marquez. (Hurley, Emory) (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Supplemental Cover Sheet, #3 Exhibit A)(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: Colter v. Marquez
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Roman Colter
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Rosemary Marquez
Represented By: Emory Thomas Hurley
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 [ 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?