CHILDRESS v. R.B. HINKLE CONSTRUCTION, INC. et al
| KENNETH CHILDRESS |
| R.B. HINKLE CONSTRUCTION, INC. and JOVEL SANCHEZ |
| 1:2022cv00007 |
| January 4, 2022 |
| US District Court for the District of Columbia |
| Randolph D Moss |
| P.I.: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 2, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
MINUTE ORDER: Due to a conflict in the Court's calendar, the video scheduling conference in this matter currently scheduled for March 7, 2022, at 10:30 a.m., is hereby VACATED and RESCHEDULED for March 14, 2022, at 9:30 a.m. To access the video scheduling conference, the parties are to use the same log-in information previously provided by the Deputy Clerk of Court. Signed by Judge Randolph D. Moss on 03/02/2022. (lcrdm3)
|
| Filing 11 MEET AND CONFER STATEMENT. (Duffy, Ryan) |
| Filing 10 Receipt on 2/17/2022 of ORIGINAL FILE, certified copy of transfer order and docket sheet from Superior Court. Superior Court Number 2021 CA 004017 V. (znmw) |
| Filing 9 NOTICE of Appearance by Stuart Lipshutz on behalf of KENNETH CHILDRESS (Lipshutz, Stuart) |
| Filing 8 NOTICE of Appearance by Barton David Moorstein on behalf of KENNETH CHILDRESS (Moorstein, Barton) |
|
Filing 7
ORDER: It is hereby ORDERED that the parties shall appear, by video, for an Initial Scheduling Conference on March 7, 2022, at 10:30 a.m. The parties will receive access information for the video conference from the Deputy Clerk of Court prior to the hearing. It is further ORDERED that the parties shall submit a report and a proposed scheduling order pursuant to Local Civil Rule 16.3(d) on or before February 28, 2022. See document for details. Signed by Judge Randolph D. Moss on 1/19/2022. (lcrdm3)
|
| Set/Reset Deadlines/Hearings: Initial Scheduling Conference set for 3/7/2022, at 10:30 AM, by video, before Judge Randolph D. Moss. Proposed Scheduling Order due by 2/28/2022. (kt) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE of Supplement to the Notice of Removal by R.B. HINKLE CONSTRUCTION, INC. re #2 Errata (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - Answer to Complaint)(Duffy, Ryan) |
|
Filing 5
STANDING ORDER: The parties are hereby ORDERED to comply with the directives set forth in the attached Standing Order. See document for details. Signed by Judge Randolph D. Moss on 1/14/2022. (lcrdm3)
|
| Filing 4 NOTICE to Counsel/Party re #1 Notice of Removal, (zsb) |
| Case Assigned to Judge Randolph D. Moss. (zsb) |
| Filing 3 LCvR 26.1 CERTIFICATE OF DISCLOSURE of Corporate Affiliations and Financial Interests by R.B. HINKLE CONSTRUCTION, INC. (Duffy, Ryan) |
| Filing 2 ERRATA to Notice of Removal by R.B. HINKLE CONSTRUCTION, INC.. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit, #2 Civil Cover Sheet)(Duffy, Ryan) |
| NOTICE OF ERROR re #1 Notice of Removal; emailed to ryan.duffy@wilsonelser.com, cc'd 0 associated attorneys -- The PDF file you docketed contained errors: 1. Noncompliance with LCvR 5.1(c). Please file an errata correcting the initiating pleading to include the name & full residence address of each party using the event Errata., 2. COMPLIANCE DEADLINE is by close of business today. This case will not proceed any further until all errors are satisfied. (zsb, ) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Superior Court for the District of Columbia, case number 2021 CA 004017 V Filing fee $ 402, receipt number ADCDC-8958092 filed by R.B. HINKLE CONSTRUCTION, INC.. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1, #2 Civil Cover Sheet)(Duffy, Ryan) |
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 District Of Columbia 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.
