Kathryn Sax v. Cadogan Tate Los Angeles Limited et al
| Kathryn Sax |
| Cadogan Tate Los Angeles Limited and DOES 1 through 60, inclusive |
| 2:2018cv10443 |
| December 17, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Philip S Gutierrez |
| Frederick F Mumm |
| Civil Rights: Jobs |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on December 23, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 13 Amended NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff Kathryn Sax, (Cruz, Ashley) |
| Filing 12 NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff Kathryn Sax, (Cruz, Ashley) |
| Filing 11 DEMAND for Jury Trial filed by plaintiff Kathryn Sax.. (Cruz, Ashley) |
Filing 10
ORDER SETTING SCHEDULING CONFERENCE by Judge Philip S. Gutierrez. Scheduling Conference set for 7/22/2019, at 02:00 PM before Judge Philip S. Gutierrez. (smo)
|
|
Filing 9
STANDING ORDER REGARDING NEWLY ASSIGNED CASES by Judge Philip S. Gutierrez. (ji)
|
| Filing 8 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (ghap) |
| Filing 7 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Philip S. Gutierrez and Magistrate Judge Frederick F. Mumm. (ghap) |
| Filing 6 PROOF OF SERVICE filed by Defendant Cadogan Tate Los Angeles Limited, re Corporate Disclosure Statement #5 , Notice of Related Case(s) #3 , Certificate/Notice of Interested Parties #4 , Notice of Removal (Attorney Civil Case Opening),, #1 , Civil Cover Sheet (CV-71) #2 served on 12/17/18. (Becerra, James) |
| CONFORMED FILED COPY OF ANSWER to Complaint - (Discovery) filed by Defendant Cadogan Tate Los Angeles Limited. (FILED IN STATE COURT ON 12/14/2018 SUBMITTED ATTACHED EXHIBIT D)(ghap) |
| NON CONFORM COPY OF PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Kathryn Sax, upon Defendant Cadogan Tate Los Angeles Limited served on 11/7/2018, answer due 11/28/2018. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon Joanna Gonzalez, Manager in compliance with California Code of Civil Procedure by substituted service at business address and by also mailing a copy.Original Summons NOT returned. (SUBMITTED ATTACHED EXHIBIT C) (ghap) |
| CONFORMED FILED COPY OF COMPLAINT against Defendants Cadogan Tate Los Angeles Limited, Does.Jury Demanded., filed by plaintiff Kathryn Sax. (FILED IN STATE COURT ON 10/26/2018 SUBMITTED ATTACHED EXHIBIT A) (ghap) |
| Filing 5 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT filed by Defendant Cadogan Tate Los Angeles Limited identifying CADOGAN TATE GROUP LIMITED as Corporate Parent. (Becerra, James) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Defendant Cadogan Tate Los Angeles Limited, identifying Plaintiff Kathryn Sax; Defendant Cadogan Tate Los Angeles Limited; and Cadogan Tate Group Limited. (Becerra, James) |
| Filing 3 NOTICE of Related Case(s) filed by Defendant Cadogan Tate Los Angeles Limited. Related Case(s): None (Becerra, James) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Defendant Cadogan Tate Los Angeles Limited. (Becerra, James) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Los Angeles Superior Court, case number 18STCV02629 Receipt No: 0973-22909847 - Fee: $400, filed by Defendant Cadogan Tate Los Angeles Limited. (Attachments: #1 Declaration of James Becerra, #2 Exhibit A Complaint, #3 Exhibit B Remaining pleadings, #4 Exhibit C Proof of Service, #5 Exhibit D Answer, #6 Declaration of Catherine Sanders, #7 Declaration of Jaime Laurent) (Attorney James Becerra added to party Cadogan Tate Los Angeles Limited(pty:dft))(Becerra, James) |
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 California Central 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.
