Costerus et al v. Jenkins et al
| Alec S. Costerus and Denise M. Costerus |
| Jacob Jenkins, Grace Mancuso, Blake Reese Davis, Kevin Cromwell, Board of County Commissioners of the County of Douglas, The, Darren Weekly and Elizabeth Wilcox |
| 1:2026cv02823 |
| June 23, 2026 |
| U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado |
| Cyrus Y Chung |
| S Kato Crews |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on August 14, 2026. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 20 NOTICE OF PRO SE E-FILING PRIVILEGES: Plaintiff, Alec S. Costerus, sought and received e-filing privileges on 8/14/2026. All further service will be effectuated electronically via CM/ECF to the email address of record.(Text Only Entry) (dgumb, ) |
Filing 19
ORDER granting #18 Second Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to Answer or Otherwise Respond. For good cause, Elizabeth Wilcox is granted an extension of up to and including September 10, 2026, to respond to the Complaint. By Judge S. Kato Crews on 6/12/2026. For all non-e-filer pro se parties, a copy of this document has been sent via U.S. Mail to the mailing address of record. Text Only Entry(skcja, )
|
| Filing 18 Second MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer or Otherwise Respond re #1 Complaint, for Defendant Elizabeth Wilcox to Respond to Complaint by Defendant Elizabeth Wilcox. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order (PDF Only))(Hendrickson, Christian) |
|
Filing 17
ORDER granting #16 Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to Answer or Otherwise Respond. For good cause, Elizabeth Wilcox is granted an extension of up to and including August 11, 2026, to respond to the Complaint. By Judge S. Kato Crews on 7/9/2026. For all non-e-filer pro se parties, a copy of this document has been sent via U.S. Mail to the mailing address of record. Text Only Entry(skcja, )
|
| Filing 16 Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer or Otherwise Respond re #1 Complaint, by Defendant Elizabeth Wilcox. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order (PDF Only))(Hendrickson, Christian) |
| Filing 15 SUMMONS Returned Executed Elizabeth Wilcox served on 6/30/2026, answer due 7/21/2026. (jrobe, ) |
| Filing 14 Waiver filed by Plaintiff Alec S. Costerus (Attachments: #1 Waiver, #2 Waiver)(jrobe, ) |
| Filing 13 NOTICE of a Lawsuit and Request to Waive Service of a Summons by Plaintiff Alec S. Costerus. (jrobe, ) |
| Filing 12 CONSENT to Jurisdiction of Magistrate Judge by Plaintiff Alec S. Costerus All parties do not consent. (jrobe, ) |
|
Filing 11
MINUTE ORDER: Pursuant to the Order of Reference, this Court will hold the Fed. R. Civ. P. 16(b) Scheduling Conference on September 1, 2026 at 11:15 a.m., in Courtroom C-201, on the second floor of the Byron G. Rogers United States Courthouse located at 1929 Stout Street, Denver, Colorado. It is further ORDERED that Plaintiff shall notify all Parties who have not entered an appearance of the date and time of the Scheduling Conference. The Parties shall file the proposed Scheduling Order with the Clerk's Office, and in accordance with District of Colorado Electronic Case Filing ("ECF") Procedures, no later than seven days prior to the scheduling conference. The proposed Scheduling Order is also to be submitted in Word format by email to Magistrate Judge Chung at [email protected]. Entered by Magistrate Judge Cyrus Y. Chung on 06/30/2026. For all non-e-filer pro se parties, a copy of this document has been sent via U.S. Mail to the mailing address of record. (agryan)
|
| Filing 10 ADVISEMENT TO PRO SE LITIGANTS OF AVAILABLE RESOURCES: Since at least one party is not represented by counsel the Court would like to apprise any and all pro se parties of a couple of resources available to people representing themselves in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado. The first is the Federal Pro Se Clinic which provides free legal assistance to people representing themselves in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado. The Clinic helps to prepare responsive pleadings, assist with other common pleadings, answers procedural questions, and explains legal concepts such as jurisdiction, venue, and service of process. Pro se parties may contact the Clinic by phone (303-824-5395) or online at www.cobar.org/cofederalproseclinic.The second is the Federal Limited Appearance Program (FLAP). FLAP aims to address the difficulty pro se parties in civil litigation sometimes face when appearing in court for certain non-dispositive hearings or conferences--such as scheduling conferences, status conferences, discovery hearings, and settlement conferences--by providing those litigants with a volunteer attorney who appears with them in court. Information about FLAP may be found online at www.cobar.org/For-Members/Young-Lawyers-Division/YLD-Application. By Judge S. Kato Crews on 6/29/2026. For all non-e-filer pro se parties, a copy of this document has been sent via U.S. Mail to the mailing address of record. Text Only Entry (skcja, ) |
| Filing 9 NOTICE ENCOURAGING CONSIDERATION OF CONSENT TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE JURISDICTION: This district's magistrate judges play a crucial role in the work and structure of the district court and the administration of justice. Under Local Rule 72.2, the parties have the option to consent to their case being presided over by a magistrate judge instead of a district judge. This court encourages parties to meaningfully confer and consider consenting to magistrate judge jurisdiction. There are many benefits to consenting. One such benefit is having a single judicial officer preside over every aspect of your case rather than two. A second benefit is the certainty of not having your trial date vacated when set before a magistrate judge. District judges preside over felony criminal cases and those cases receive priority over civil cases because of a criminal defendant's speedy trial rights. Magistrate judges do not preside over felony criminal cases, and therefore, they do not have to vacate civil trials because of criminal cases. If the parties do not choose to consent to magistrate judge jurisdiction, they should keep in mind Local Rule 72.3. Under this rule, the parties may consent to the final determination of a dispositive motion (motion for summary judgment or motion to dismiss) by the assigned magistrate judge by filing a notice of consent for that motion. Please refer to Local Rule 72.3 for more information on that option. Consent to magistrate judge jurisdiction is voluntary, and no adverse consequence will result if one or more parties decline to consent. By Judge S. Kato Crews on 6/29/2026. For all non-e-filer pro se parties, a copy of this document has been sent via U.S. Mail to the mailing address of record. Text Only Entry (skcja, ) |
|
Filing 8
ORDER REFERRING CASE to Magistrate Judge Cyrus Y. Chung for all motions. 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, and (3) hear and determine pretrial matters, including discovery and other dispositive motions. Court-sponsored alternative dispute resolution is governed by D.C.COLO.LCivR 16.6. 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. Alternatively, the Magistrate Judge, at their discretion, may convene such early neutral evaluation and/or settlement conferences and direct related procedures as may facilitate resolution of this case without the necessity of a motion or prior authorization of the undersigned. Counsel for the Parties and all counsel who may later enter an appearance shall review and familiarize themselves with the undersigned's Standing Order and Practice Standards, as well as the Practice Standards of the assigned Magistrate Judge. By Judge S. Kato Crews on 6/29/2026. For all non-e-filer pro se parties, a copy of this document has been sent via U.S. Mail to the mailing address of record. Text Only Entry (skcja, )
|
| Filing 7 Letter from The Clerk of Court re Service of Process. (Attachments: #1 Summons, #2 Copy of rule 4) (jrobe, ) |
| Filing 6 Magistrate Judge consent form issued pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(c). (echa, ) |
|
Filing 5
ORDER DRAWING CASE by Magistrate Judge Richard T. Gurley on 6/24/2026. After review pursuant to D.C.COLO.LCivR 8.1(a), the Court has determined that this case does not appear to be appropriate for summary dismissal. Therefore, the case will be drawn to a presiding judge and, if applicable, to a magistrate judge. See D.C.COLO.LCivR 8.1(c). Accordingly, it is ordered that this case be drawn to a presiding judge and, if applicable, to a magistrate judge. (Case randomly reassigned to Judge S. Kato Crews and drawn to Magistrate Judge Cyrus Y. Chung for all further proceedings. All future pleadings should be designated as 26-cv-02823-SKC). For all non-e-filer pro se parties, a copy of this document has been sent via U.S. Mail to the mailing address of record. (echa, )
|
| Filing 4 SUMMONS issued over the counter by Clerk. (dhern, ) |
| Filing 3 Case assigned to Magistrate Judge Richard T. Gurley for Initial Review pursuant to D.C.COLO.LCivR 8.1 (a). Text Only Entry. (dhern, ) |
| Filing 2 Civil Cover Sheet in Support of #1 Complaint, by Plaintiffs Alec S. Costerus, Denise M. Costerus. (dhern, ) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT and Jury Demand against Board of County Commissioners of the County of Douglas, The, Kevin Cromwell, Blake Reese Davis, Jacob Jenkins, Grace Mancuso, Darren Weekly, Elizabeth Wilcox Filing Fee: $405 Receipt Number:118490, filed by Denise M. Costerus, Alec S. Costerus. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(dhern, ) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. 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 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.
