Wade v. Burns
| Katherine Wade |
| Mark Vane Burns |
| 3:2018cv01636 |
| September 28, 2018 |
| US District Court for the District of Connecticut |
| Charles S Haight |
| Other Statutory Actions |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1442 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on February 25, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 11 EXHIBIT C by Mark Vane Burns re #10 Memorandum in Opposition to Motion. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit EXHIBIT C (2), #2 Exhibit EXHIBIT C (3))(Burns, Mark) |
| Filing 10 Memorandum in Opposition re #9 MOTION to Remand to Agency filed by Mark Vane Burns. (Attachments: #1 Affidavit Supplemental Affidavit In Support of Removal and In Opposition To Remand)(Burns, Mark) |
| Filing 9 MOTION to Remand to Agency by Katherine Wade.Responses due by 11/16/2018 (Attachments: #1 Memorandum in Support, #2 Exhibit A)(Caley, James) |
| Filing 8 First RESPONSE re #5 Order, #1 Notice of Removal, filed by Mark Vane Burns. (Burns, Mark) |
| Filing 7 NOTICE of Appearance by James W. Caley on behalf of Katherine Wade (Caley, James) |
Filing 6
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER (see attached). The Commissioner must respond to Burns's removal papers in the manner prescribed by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, including in that response any comments she may have as to whether removal of this claim from a state administrative proceeding is proper under 28 U.S.C. 1441(a), 1442(a). Burns's #2 Motion for a hearing is hereby DENIED as premature, given the present issues concerning the viability of the removal. Signed by Judge Charles S. Haight, Jr. on October 2, 2018. (Dorais, L.)
|
|
Filing 5
STANDING ORDER ON REMOVED CASES Signed by Judge Charles S. Haight, Jr on 9/28/2018.(Freberg, B)
|
|
Filing 4
ELECTRONIC FILING ORDER FOR COUNSEL - PLEASE ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH COURTESY COPY REQUIREMENTS IN THIS ORDER Signed by Judge Charles S. Haight, Jr on 9/28/2018.(Freberg, B)
|
|
Filing 3
Order on Pretrial Deadlines: Amended Pleadings due by 11/27/2018 Discovery due by 3/30/2019 Dispositive Motions due by 5/4/2019 Signed by Judge Charles S. Haight, Jr on 9/28/2018.(Freberg, B)
|
| Judge Charles S. Haight, Jr added. (Anastasio, F.) |
| Filing 2 MOTION for Hearing re #1 Notice of Removal, by Mark Vane Burns. (Burns, Mark) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL by Mark Vane Burns from Department of Insurance, case number 17-08. Filing fee $ 400 receipt number ACTDC-4989767, filed by Mark Vane Burns. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Affidavit, #4 Appendix Notice of Filing)(Burns, Mark) |
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 Connecticut 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
| Search for this case: Wade v. Burns | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Katherine Wade | |
| Represented By: | James W. Caley |
| 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: Mark Vane Burns | |
| Represented By: | Mark Vane Burns |
| 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.
