Walker et al v. Unitrin Auto & Home Insurance Company et al
| Michael Walker and Tashell Mitchel |
| Unitrin Auto & Home Insurance Company, Financial Indemnity Company and Unitrin Direct Property & Casualty Company |
| 3:2014cv03161 |
| July 11, 2014 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of California |
| San Francisco Office |
| San Francisco |
| Edward M. Chen |
| Insurance |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
| Defendant |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
136
STIPULATION AND ORDER re 135 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER For Dismissal with Prejudice filed by Financial Indemnity Company. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 5/6/16. (bpfS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/6/2016)
|
|
Filing
134
90-day Conditional Dismissal. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 3/28/16. (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/28/2016)
|
|
Filing
131
ORDER re Use of Written Discovery Responses. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 3/22/2016. (emclc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/22/2016)
|
|
Filing
129
ORDER RE COURT'S PROPOSED JURY INSTRUCTIONS. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 3/21/16. (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/21/2016)
|
|
Filing
108
ORDER re Pretrial Filings. Plaintiff shall file all required pretrial filings by 5:00 p.m., March 3, 2016, or he shall be sanctioned. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 3/2/2016. (emclc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/2/2016)
|
|
Filing
83
STIPULATION AND ORDER re 82 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER Extending Expert Discovery filed by Michael Walker. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 11/25/15. (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/25/2015)
|
|
Filing
72
STIPULATION AND ORDER re 71 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER (Joint) to Continue Deadline to File Discovery Motions filed by Financial Indemnity Company Discovery due by 10/22/2015. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 10/19/15. (bpfS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/19/2015)
|
|
Filing
70
ORDER by Judge Edward M. Chen Granting 69 Defendant's Leave to Amend. (emcsec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/29/2015)
|
|
Filing
67
STIPULATION AND ORDER re 66 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER Stipulated Protective Order for Standard Litigation filed by Financial Indemnity Company. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 8/13/15. (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/13/2015)
|
|
Filing
62
ORDER by Judge Edward M. Chen denying 46 Motion for Summary Judgment (emclc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/5/2015)
|
|
Filing
41
STIPULATION AND ORDER re 39 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER Stipulation of Voluntary Dismissal of (1) All Claims of Plaintiff Tashell Mitchel, and (2) Defendants Unitrin Auto and Home Insurance Company, and Unitrin Direct Property and Casualty Company; [Proposed] Order filed by Financial Indemnity Company, Unitrin Direct Property & Casualty Company, Unitrin Auto & Home Insurance Company. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 1/5/15. (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/5/2015)
|
|
Filing
30
STIPULATION AND ORDER re 29 STIPULATION and Proposed Order selecting Early Neutral Evaluation by Financial Indemnity Company, Unitrin Auto & Home Insurance Company, Unitrin Direct Property & Casualty Company filed by Financial Indemnity Company, Unitrin Direct Property & Casualty Company, Unitrin Auto & Home Insurance Company, ORDER REFERRING CASE to Early Neutral Evaluation. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 9/24/14. (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/24/2014)
|
|
Filing
15
STANDING ORDER. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 7/31/14. (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/31/2014)
|
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 Northern 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.
