Morris v. Securecare Options, LLC
| Nadesha Morris |
| Securecare Options, LLC |
| 3:2021cv01144 |
| August 26, 2021 |
| US District Court for the District of Connecticut |
| Jeffrey A Meyer |
| Labor: Family and Medical Leave Act |
| 29 U.S.C. ยง 2612 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 28, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 11
ORDER. The Court DENIES the motion for default entry (Doc. #8 ) in light of the defendant's interim filing of an answer (Doc. #10 ). It is so ordered. Signed by Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer on 9/28/21. (Barry, Donna)
|
| Filing 10 ANSWER to #1 Complaint by Securecare Options, LLC.(Starble, Jonathan) |
| Filing 9 NOTICE of Appearance by Jonathan M. Starble on behalf of Securecare Options, LLC (Starble, Jonathan) |
| Filing 8 MOTION for Default Entry 55(a) as to Securecare Options, LLC by Nadesha Morris. (Michaud, Megan) |
| Filing 7 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Nadesha Morris. Securecare Options, LLC served on 9/2/2021, answer due 9/23/2021. (Michaud, Megan) |
| Filing 6 ELECTRONIC SUMMONS ISSUED in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 and LR 4 as to *Securecare Options, LLC* with answer to complaint due within *21* days. Attorney *Megan Leigh Michaud* *Cicchiello & Cicchiello, LLP* *364 Franklin Avenue* *Hartford, CT 06114*. (Carr, Dave) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE TO COUNSEL/SELF-REPRESENTED PARTIES : Counsel or self-represented parties initiating or removing this action are responsible for serving all parties with attached documents and copies of #1 Complaint filed by Nadesha Morris, #3 Electronic Filing Order, #2 Order on Pretrial Deadlines, #4 Protective Order Signed by Clerk on 08/26/2021.(Carr, Dave) |
|
Filing 4
STANDING PROTECTIVE ORDER Signed by Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer on 08/26/2021.(Carr, Dave)
|
|
Filing 3
ELECTRONIC FILING ORDER FOR COUNSEL - PLEASE ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH COURTESY COPY REQUIREMENTS IN THIS ORDER Signed by Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer on 08/26/2021.(Carr, Dave)
|
|
Filing 2
Order on Pretrial Deadlines: Amended Pleadings due by 10/25/2021 Discovery due by 2/25/2022 Dispositive Motions due by 4/1/2022 Signed by Clerk on 08/26/2021.(Carr, Dave)
|
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Securecare Options, LLC ( Filing fee $402 receipt number ACTDC-6625123.), filed by Nadesha Morris.(Michaud, Megan) |
| Request for Clerk to issue summons as to Securecare Options, LLC. (Michaud, Megan) |
| Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer added. (Oliver, T.) |
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: Morris v. Securecare Options, LLC | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Nadesha Morris | |
| Represented By: | Megan Leigh Michaud |
| 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: Securecare Options, LLC | |
| Represented By: | Jonathan M. Starble |
| 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.
