McCarty Excavation and Construction, Inc. v. Jita Contracting, Inc. et al
Plaintiff: McCarty Excavation and Construction, Inc.
Defendant: Jita Contracting, Inc. and Cincinnati Insurance Company, The
Case Number: 1:2022cv02284
Filed: September 2, 2022
Court: US District Court for the District of Colorado
Presiding Judge: Raymond P Moore
Referring Judge: Scott T Varholak
Nature of Suit: Miller Act
Cause of Action: 40 U.S.C. ยง 3131 Miller Act
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on October 31, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
October 31, 2022 Filing 12 NOTICE of Entry of Appearance by Mark Edward Ringer on behalf of McCarty Excavation and Construction, Inc.Attorney Mark Edward Ringer added to party McCarty Excavation and Construction, Inc.(pty:pla) (Ringer, Mark)
October 28, 2022 Filing 11 WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed by McCarty Excavation and Construction, Inc.. Jita Contracting, Inc. waiver sent on 10/27/2022, answer due 12/27/2022. (Dunkin, Andrew)
October 20, 2022 Filing 10 WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed by McCarty Excavation and Construction, Inc.. Cincinnati Insurance Company, The waiver sent on 10/14/2022, answer due 12/13/2022. (Dunkin, Andrew)
September 6, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 9 ORDER SETTING SCHEDULING CONFERENCE by Magistrate Judge Scott T. Varholak on September 6, 2022. Proposed Scheduling Order due 11/1/2022 Scheduling Conference set for 11/8/2022 09:00 AM in Courtroom A 402 before Magistrate Judge Scott T. Varholak. (csarr, )
September 6, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 8 MINUTE ORDER: With the assignment of this matter, the parties are advised that throughout this case they are expected to be familiar and comply with not only the Local Rules of this District, but also Judge Raymond P. Moore's Civil Practice Standards, which may be found at: http://www.cod.uscourts.gov/JudicialOfficers/ActiveArticleIIIJudges/HonRaymondPMoore.aspx. SO ORDERED by Judge Raymond P. Moore on 9/6/2022. (Text Only Entry) (rmsec)
September 6, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 7 ORDER REFERRING CASE to Magistrate Judge Scott T. Varholak. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(A) and (B) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a) and (b), this case is referred to the assigned United States Magistrate Judge to (1) convene a scheduling conference under Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b) and enter a scheduling order meeting the requirements of D.C.COLO.LCivR 16.2, (2) conduct such status conferences and issue such orders necessary for compliance with the scheduling order, including amendments or modifications of the scheduling order upon a showing of good cause, (3) hear and determine pretrial matters, including discovery and other non-dispositive motions, (4) conduct a pretrial conference and enter a pretrial order, and (5) conduct hearings, including evidentiary hearings, and submit proposed findings of fact and recommendations for rulings on dispositive motions. Court sponsored alternative dispute resolution is governed by D.C.COLO.LCivR 16.6. On the recommendation or informal request of the magistrate judge or on the request of the parties by motion, this court may direct the parties to engage in an early neutral evaluation, a settlement conference, or another alternative dispute resolution proceeding. By Judge Raymond P. Moore on 9/6/2022. (Text Only Entry) (rmsec )
September 2, 2022 Filing 6 NOTICE re #1 Complaint, Civil Cover Sheet #1 by Plaintiff McCarty Excavation and Construction, Inc. (Dunkin, Andrew)
September 2, 2022 Filing 5 SUMMONS issued by Clerk. (Attachments: #1 Summons, #2 Magistrate Judge Consent Form) (jtorr, )
September 2, 2022 Filing 4 Case assigned to Judge Raymond P. Moore and drawn to Magistrate Judge Scott T. Varholak. Text Only Entry. (jtorr, )
September 2, 2022 Filing 3 SUMMONS REQUEST as to The Cincinnati Insurance Company re #1 Complaint, by Plaintiff McCarty Excavation and Construction, Inc.. (Dunkin, Andrew)
September 2, 2022 Filing 2 SUMMONS REQUEST as to Jita Contracting, Inc. re #1 Complaint, by Plaintiff McCarty Excavation and Construction, Inc.. (Dunkin, Andrew)
September 2, 2022 Filing 1 COMPLAINT and Jury Demand against All Defendants (Filing fee $ 402,Receipt Number ACODC-8639859)Attorney Andrew Nathan Dunkin added to party McCarty Excavation and Construction, Inc.(pty:pla), filed by McCarty Excavation and Construction, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1 - GC Bond, #2 Exhibit 2 - McCarty Jita MSA, #3 Exhibit 3 - Contract Addenda)(Dunkin, Andrew)

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: McCarty Excavation and Construction, Inc. v. Jita Contracting, Inc. et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: McCarty Excavation and Construction, Inc.
Represented By: Andrew Nathan Dunkin
Represented By: Mark Edward Ringer
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: Jita Contracting, Inc.
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: Cincinnati Insurance Company, The
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?