Council v. Target Corporation

Council v. Target Corporation

Plaintiff:	Bryan P. Council
Defendant:	Target Corporation
Case Number:	1:2013cv03479
Filed:	December 23, 2013
Court:	US District Court for the District of Colorado
Office:	Denver Office
County:	Denver
Presiding Judge:	Christine M. Arguello
Presiding Judge:	Kathleen M. Tafoya
Nature of Suit:	Other Personal Injury
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 1332
Jury Demanded By:	Plaintiff

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
March 5, 2014	Filing 26 ORDER. Target's Motion to Stay Proceedings 15 is GRANTED. This case is STAYED until such time as the JPML resolves the request to transfer this action into a multidistrict litigation. The parties shall file a status report within five days o f the date the JPML issues its ruling on the motion to transfer this action to an MDL. Joint Motion for Extension of Time for Briefing Schedule, Hearing on Motion for Protective Order, and Scheduling Conference 16 is GRANTED. The reply to the Mo tion for Protective Order shall be filed no later than ten days of a ruling on by the JPML, in the event the JPML does not transfer this case to an MDL. The Scheduling Conference and motion hearing set for 4/8/2014, and all deadlines associated with the Scheduling Conference are VACATED, by Magistrate Judge Kathleen M. Tafoya on 3/5/14.(sgrim)
January 9, 2014	Filing 13 ORDER Setting Scheduling Conference for 4/8/2014 at 10:30 AM in Courtroom C201 before Magistrate Judge Kathleen M. Tafoya, by Magistrate Judge Kathleen M. Tafoya on 1/9/14. (sgrim)

Date Filed

Document Text

March 5, 2014

Filing 26 ORDER. Target's Motion to Stay Proceedings 15 is GRANTED. This case is STAYED until such time as the JPML resolves the request to transfer this action into a multidistrict litigation. The parties shall file a status report within five days o f the date the JPML issues its ruling on the motion to transfer this action to an MDL. Joint Motion for Extension of Time for Briefing Schedule, Hearing on Motion for Protective Order, and Scheduling Conference 16 is GRANTED. The reply to the Mo tion for Protective Order shall be filed no later than ten days of a ruling on by the JPML, in the event the JPML does not transfer this case to an MDL. The Scheduling Conference and motion hearing set for 4/8/2014, and all deadlines associated with the Scheduling Conference are VACATED, by Magistrate Judge Kathleen M. Tafoya on 3/5/14.(sgrim)

January 9, 2014

Filing 13 ORDER Setting Scheduling Conference for 4/8/2014 at 10:30 AM in Courtroom C201 before Magistrate Judge Kathleen M. Tafoya, by Magistrate Judge Kathleen M. Tafoya on 1/9/14. (sgrim)

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 Colorado District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Council v. Target Corporation
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Defendant: Target Corporation
Represented By:	Scott F. Llewellyn
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: Bryan P. Council
Represented By:	Benjamin Michael Lopatin
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?