Sobehart v. Cartus Corporation
| Nadia Sobehart |
| Cartus Corporation |
| 3:2023cv01690 |
| December 28, 2023 |
| US District Court for the District of Connecticut |
| Sarala V Nagala |
| S Dave Vatti |
| Civil Rights: Jobs |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 2000 Job Discrimination (Sex) |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on January 11, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 9 Initial Discovery Protocols for Employment Cases Alleging Adverse Action. Signed by Judge Sarala V. Nagala on 1-11-2024. (Shafer, J.) |
| Filing 8 ELECTRONIC SUMMONS ISSUED in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 and LR 4 as to *Cartus Corporation* with answer to complaint due within *21* days. Attorney *Michael C. McMinn* *The McMinn Employment Law Firm, LLC* *1000 Lafayette Blvd. Suite 1100* *Bridgeport, CT 06604*. (Shafer, J.) |
| Filing 7 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 #3 Order on Pretrial Deadlines, #1 Complaint, #6 Notice re Initial Discovery Disclosures, Dkt. 2 Notice re: Disclosure Statement, #4 Electronic Filing Order, and #5 Standing Protective Order. Signed by Clerk on 1-2-2024. (Shafer, J.) |
| Filing 6 Notice re Initial Discovery Protocols. Signed by Clerk on 12-28-2023. (Attachments: #1 Identification of Initial Discovery Protocol for Employment Cases) (Shafer, J.) |
Filing 5
STANDING PROTECTIVE ORDER. Signed by Judge Sarala V. Nagala on 12-28-2023. (Shafer, J.)
|
|
Filing 4
ELECTRONIC FILING ORDER FOR COUNSEL - PLEASE ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH COURTESY COPY REQUIREMENTS IN THIS ORDER. Signed by Judge Sarala V. Nagala on 12-28-2023. (Shafer, J.)
|
|
Filing 3
Order on Pretrial Deadlines: amended pleadings due by 2-26-2024, discovery due by 6-28-2024, and dispositive motions due by 8-2-2024. Signed by Clerk on 12-28-2023. (Shafer, J.)
|
| Filing 2 Notice: Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 7.1, a disclosure statement must be filed with a party's first appearance, pleading, petition, motion, response, or other request addressed to the Court and must be supplemented if any required information changes during the case. Signed by Clerk on 12/28/2023.(Perez, J.) |
| Judge Sarala V. Nagala and Judge S. Dave Vatti added. (Oliver, T.) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Cartus Corporation ( Filing fee $405 receipt number ACTDC-7596966.), filed by Nadia Sobehart. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Civil Cover Sheet)(McMinn, Michael) |
| Request for Clerk to issue summons as to Cartus Corporation. (McMinn, Michael) |
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: Sobehart v. Cartus Corporation | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Nadia Sobehart | |
| Represented By: | Michael C. McMinn |
| 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: Cartus Corporation | |
| 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.
