Andrea Estrada v. Los Angeles Unified School District et al
| Andrea Estrada |
| Los Angeles Unified School District and Does 1 to 100, inclusive |
| 2:2023cv02965 |
| April 19, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Pedro V Castillo |
| Mark C Scarsi |
| Civil Rights: Jobs |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment) |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on May 31, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 16
ORDER REGARDING THE COURT APPROVING THE JOINT STIPULATION OF PARTIES REGARDING DISMISSAL OF PLAINTIFF'S FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION FOR WRONGFUL TERMINATION WITH PREJUDICE #15 by Judge Mark C. Scarsi. (lc)
|
| Filing 15 Joint STIPULATION to Exclude Plaintiffs Fifth Cause of Action For Wrongful Termination with Prejudice filed by Defendants Los Angeles Unified School District. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order Regarding The Joint Stipulation of Parties Regarding Defendants Dismissal of Plaintiffs Fifth Cause of Action For Wrongful Termination with Prejudice)(Michaels, Connie) |
|
Filing 14
ORDER SETTING SCHEDULING CONFERENCE by Judge Mark C. Scarsi. Scheduling Conference set for 7/17/2023 at 10:00 AM before Judge Mark C. Scarsi. (smo)
|
| Filing 13 NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Defendant Los Angeles Unified School District, (Michaels, Connie) |
| Filing 12 ANSWER to Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 filed by Defendant Los Angeles Unified School District.(Attorney Connie Lee Michaels added to party Los Angeles Unified School District(pty:dft))(Michaels, Connie) |
| Filing 11 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Andrea Estrada, upon Defendant Los Angeles Unified School District served on 5/1/2023, answer due 5/22/2023. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon Janet Saavedra in compliance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure by service on a domestic corporation, unincorporated association, or public entity (Peffer, Michael) |
|
Filing 10
INITIAL STANDING ORDER FOR CIVIL CASES ASSIGNED TO JUDGE MARK C. SCARSI upon filing of the complaint by Judge Mark C. Scarsi. (smo)
|
|
Filing 9
ORDER RETURNING CASE FOR REASSIGNMENT by Judge Christina A. Snyder. ORDER case returned to the Clerk for random reassignment pursuant to General Order 21-01. Case randomly reassigned from Judge Christina A. Snyder to Judge Mark C. Scarsi for all further proceedings. The case number will now reflect the initials of the transferee Judge 2:23-cv-02965 MCS(PVCx). (rn)
|
| Filing 8 21 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 as to Defendant Los Angeles Unified School District. (car) |
| Filing 7 Notice to Counsel Re Consent to Proceed Before a United States Magistrate Judge. (car) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (car) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Christina A. Snyder and Magistrate Judge Pedro V. Castillo. (car) |
| Filing 4 CERTIFICATE of Interested Parties filed by plaintiff Andrea Estrada, (Peffer, Michael) |
| Filing 3 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiff Andrea Estrada. (Peffer, Michael) |
| Filing 2 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 filed by plaintiff Andrea Estrada. (Peffer, Michael) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: ACACDC-35166790 - Fee: $402, filed by plaintiff Andrea Estrada. (Attorney Michael J Peffer added to party Andrea Estrada(pty:pla))(Peffer, Michael) |
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.
