Locke v. National Railroad Passenger Corporation
Plaintiff: Shantell Locke
Defendant: National Railroad Passenger Corporation doing business as Amtrak
Case Number: 6:2020cv06080
Filed: August 3, 2020
Court: US District Court for the Western District of Arkansas
Presiding Judge: Robert T Dawson
Nature of Suit: P.I.: Other
Cause of Action: 28:1332
Jury Demanded By: Both
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on September 30, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
September 30, 2020 Filing 15 NOTICE of Appearance by Joseph P. McKay on behalf of National Railroad Passenger Corporation. (McKay, Joseph)
September 29, 2020 Filing 14 FINAL SCHEDULING ORDER: Jury Trial set for 11/15/2021 09:00 AM in Hot Springs -- 3rd flr (Rm 360) before Honorable Robert T. Dawson. Signed by Honorable Robert T. Dawson on September 29, 2020. (mjm)
September 29, 2020 TEXT ONLY CLERK'S NOTICE re Multiple Attorneys Listed on Pleading directed to Defendant National Railroad Passenger Corporation. Report of Rule 26(f) Planning Meeting #13 , Answer to Complaint (Attorney filed Complaint) #9 lists multiple attorneys appearing for the filer. The following attorney, who did not sign the pleading, must enter a separate Notice of Appearance in order to receive electronic notification of future activity in the case: Joseph P. McKay. (mjm)
September 28, 2020 Filing 13 JOINT REPORT of Rule 26(f) Planning Meeting by National Railroad Passenger Corporation. (McCarroll, Mary)
September 15, 2020 Filing 12 NOTICE of Appearance by Nathan L Karlin on behalf of Shantell Locke. (Karlin, Nathan)
September 9, 2020 Filing 11 NOTICE of Appearance by Mary McCarroll on behalf of National Railroad Passenger Corporation. (McCarroll, Mary)
September 8, 2020 Filing 10 INITIAL SCHEDULING ORDER: Rule 26 Meeting Report due by 9/29/2020. Jury Trial set for 11/15/2021 09:00 AM in Hot Springs -- 3rd flr (Rm 360) before Honorable Robert T. Dawson. Signed by Honorable Robert T. Dawson on September 8, 2020. (mjm)
September 4, 2020 Filing 9 ANSWER to #2 Complaint with Jury Demand by National Railroad Passenger Corporation.(Tucker, Scott)
August 28, 2020 Filing 8 AFFIDAVIT of Service for Complaint and summons, filed by All Plaintiffs. Defendant served 08/24/20, Answer due 9/14/2020 . (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Exhibit A, File marked complaint, #2 Exhibit Exhibit B, Receipt card for USPS, #3 Exhibit Exhibit C, Summons)(Berry, Travis) Modified on 8/31/2020 to add text regarding service (mjm).
August 5, 2020 Filing 7 TEXT ONLY ORDER granting #6 Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice. Nathan Karlin is directed to immediately register for Pro Hac Vice filer access through PACER and enter his appearance in this matter. Signed by Honorable Robert T. Dawson on August 5, 2020. (mcc)
August 5, 2020 Filing 6 First MOTION for Attorney Nathan Karlin to Appear Pro Hac Vice (PHV Application fee paid $ 100; receipt number AARWDC-2194140) by Shantell Locke. (Berry, Travis)
August 4, 2020 Filing 5 THE DOCUMENT IS RESTRICTED TO COURT USERS AND CASE PARTICIPANTS. Summons Issued as to National Railroad Passenger Corporation and returned to attorney or plaintiff for service. YOU MUST PRINT THIS ISSUED SUMMONS, WHICH IS THE MAIN DOCUMENT. PAPER COPIES WILL NOT BE MAILED. (hnc)
August 4, 2020 Filing 4 THE DOCUMENT IS RESTRICTED TO COURT USERS. Summons Requested as to National Railroad Passenger Corporation for service of the following document: #2 Complaint. (Berry, Travis)
August 4, 2020 TEXT ONLY CLERK'S NOTICE: The following attorney(s) listed on Complaint #2 is (are) not registered for CM/ECF noticing and filing in the Western District of Arkansas:Nathan L. Karlin. An attorney can register through PACER for a CM/ECF login and password if they are admitted to practice in the U.S. District Courts for the Eastern and Western Districts of Arkansas or are admitted pro hac vice for this case. Any non-registered attorney should submit the proper attorney admission petition or file an appropriate motion. Please refer to our website http://www.arwd.uscourts.gov/attorney-information for further information. (mjm)
August 4, 2020 Filing 3 Magistrate Notice/Consent Form. (mjm)
August 3, 2020 Filing 2 COMPLAINT with Jury Demand $10,000,000.00 against National Railroad Passenger Corporation, filed by Shantell Locke.(Berry, Travis)
August 3, 2020 Filing 1 CIVIL COVER SHEET for case initiated by Shantell Locke. Please proceed with filing your case initiating document(s).If the case initiating documents are not filed by Close of Business the next business day your case may be terminated. (hnc)

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 Arkansas Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Locke v. National Railroad Passenger Corporation
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: National Railroad Passenger Corporation doing business as Amtrak
Represented By: Mary McCarroll
Represented By: Joseph P. McKay
Represented By: Scott H. Tucker
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 ]
Plaintiff: Shantell Locke
Represented By: Travis Ray Berry
Represented By: Nathan L Karlin
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?