Glenn William Lacey Jr. v. Smith and Nephew Inc
Plaintiff: Glenn William Lacey, Jr
Defendant: Smith and Nephew, Inc. and Does 1 through 50, inclusive
Case Number: 5:2019cv01628
Filed: August 27, 2019
Court: US District Court for the Central District of California
Presiding Judge: Dale S Fischer
Referring Judge: Shashi H Kewalramani
Nature of Suit: Personal Inj. Prod. Liability
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441
Jury Demanded By: Both
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on August 28, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
August 28, 2019 Filing 11 NOTICE of Withdrawal of Document #10 Inadvertently Filed filed by Defendant Smith and Nephew, Inc.. (Shaw, John)
August 28, 2019 Filing 10 JOINT REPORT Rule 26(f) Discovery Plan ; estimated length of trial 5-7 days, filed by Defendant Smith and Nephew, Inc... (Shaw, John)
August 28, 2019 Filing 9 NOTICE of Standing Order for Cases Assigned to Judge Fischer filed by Defendant Smith and Nephew, Inc.. (Shaw, John)
August 28, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 8 STANDING ORDER FOR CASES ASSIGNED TO JUDGE DALE S. FISCHER upon filing of the complaint by Judge Dale S. Fischer. If a party would be entitled to attorneys fees, counsel are referred to the Order Re Fees found on Court's website under Judge Fischer's Procedures and Schedules contained in the Judge's Requirements tab. Read all Orders carefully. They govern this case and differ in some respects from the Local Rules. COUNSEL ARE ORDERED TO PROVIDE A MANDATORY CHAMBERS COPY OF THE COMPLAINT, NOTICE OF REMOVAL, AND ANY OTHER INITIATING DOCUMENTS. (rfi)
August 28, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 7 ORDER SETTING SCHEDULING CONFERENCE by Judge Dale S. Fischer. The Joint Report must include the completed Schedule of Pretrial and Trial dates. Lead trial counsel are ordered to appear in person unless counsel have been excused by the Court. Scheduling Conference set for 12/9/2019 at 11:00 AM before Judge Dale S. Fischer. (rfi)
August 27, 2019 Filing 6 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (et)
August 27, 2019 Filing 5 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT of Eastern Division Removal Case. This case was initially assigned to District Judge Jesus G. Bernal and referred to Magistrate Judge Shashi H. Kewalramani for discovery. Pursuant to General Order 19-03, this case has been randomly reassigned to District Judge Dale S. Fischer. The case number on all documents filed with the Court in this case should read as follows: 5:19-cv-01628-DSF (SHKx). (et)
August 27, 2019 Filing 4 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT filed by Defendant Smith & Nephew Inc identifying Smith & Nephew, PLC as Corporate Parent. (Shaw, John)
August 27, 2019 Filing 3 CERTIFICATE of Interested Parties filed by Defendant Smith & Nephew Inc, identifying Smith & Nephew, PLC. (Shaw, John)
August 27, 2019 Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Defendant Smith & Nephew Inc. (Shaw, John)
August 27, 2019 Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Riverside Superior Court, case number RIC1903938 Receipt No: 0973-24334851 - Fee: $400, filed by Defendant Smith & Nephew Inc. (Attachments: #1 Declaration of J. Shaw ISO Removal, #2 Complaint for Damages, #3 Summons on Complaint, #4 Answer to Complaint, #5 POS of Summons and Complaint) (Attorney John W Shaw added to party Smith & Nephew Inc(pty:dft))(Shaw, John)
August 27, 2019 CONFORMED FILED COPY OF COMPLAINT against Defendants Smith and Nephew, Inc., Does 1 through 50, Inclusive. Jury Demanded., filed by Plaintiff Glenn William Lacey, Jr. [FILED IN STATE COURT ON 7/23/2019 SUBMITTED ATTACHED TO ATTACHMENT NO. 2 TO NOTICE OF REMOVAL #1 . (et)
August 27, 2019 CONFORMED FILED COPY OF ANSWER TO COMPLAINT; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL filed by Defendant Smith and Nephew, Inc. [FILED IN STATE COURT ON 8/22/2019 SUBMITTED ATTACHED TO NOTICE OF REMOVAL AS ATTACHMENT NO. 4 #1 . (Attorney Lisa A Satter added to party Smith and Nephew, Inc.(pty:dft))(et)
August 27, 2019 CONFORMED FILED COPY OF PROOF OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS AND COMPLAINT Executed by Plaintiff Glenn William Lacey, Jr, upon Defendant Smith and Nephew, Inc. served on 8/2/2019, answer due 8/23/2019. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon Carol Paz-Authorized to Accept Service in compliance with California Code of Civil Procedure by service on a domestic corporation, unincorporated association, or public entity.Original Summons NOT returned. [FILED IN STATE COURT ON 8/6/2019 SUBMITTED ATTACHED TO NOTICE OF REMOVAL AS ATTACHMENT NO. 5 #1 . (et)

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 this case: Glenn William Lacey Jr. v. Smith and Nephew Inc
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Smith and Nephew, Inc.
Represented By: Litsa Georgantopoulos
Represented By: John W Shaw
Represented By: Lisa A Satter
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 ]
Defendant: Does 1 through 50, inclusive
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: Glenn William Lacey, Jr
Represented By: Mark Frederick Didak
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?