Sumter Electric Cooperative, Inc. v. Mobile Energy Inc
Sumter Electric Cooperative, Inc. |
Mobile Energy Inc |
5:2021cv00095 |
February 17, 2021 |
US District Court for the Middle District of Florida |
Philip R Lammens |
James S Moody |
Contract: Other |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
None |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on June 23, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Set/reset scheduling order deadlines: Defendant disclosure of expert report due by 8/30/2021, Plaintiff disclosure of expert report due by 7/30/2021 (HAI) |
Filing 13 CASE MANAGEMENT AND SCHEDULING ORDER: Discovery due by 10/1/2021; Dispositive motions due by 11/4/2021; Pretrial Conference set for TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 8, 2022, at 9:15 A.M. in Tampa Courtroom 17 before Judge James S. Moody Jr.; BENCH TRIAL is set on the MARCH 2022 trial term in Tampa Courtroom 17 before Judge James S. Moody Jr.; Conduct MEDIATION hearing by 11/4/2021. Lead counsel to coordinate dates. Signed by Judge James S. Moody, Jr. on 3/29/2021. (SMB) |
Filing 12 CASE MANAGEMENT REPORT. (Holmes, Brandon) |
Filing 11 Answer and Affirmative Defenses to REPLY to #9 Counterclaim by Sumter Electric Cooperative, Inc.. Related document: #9 Answer to ComplaintCounterclaim filed by Mobile Energy Inc.(Barber, Mark) |
Filing 10 CERTIFICATE of interested persons and corporate disclosure statement by Mobile Energy Inc. (Sipple, Martin) |
Filing 9 ANSWER and affirmative defenses to Complaint , COUNTERCLAIM against Sumter Electric Cooperative, Inc. by Mobile Energy Inc. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - Invoice)(Sipple, Martin) Modified on 3/8/2021 (RLK). |
Filing 8 NOTICE of a related action per Local Rule 1.07(c) by Sumter Electric Cooperative, Inc.. Related case(s): No (Barber, Mark) |
Filing 7 CERTIFICATE of interested persons and corporate disclosure statement by Sumter Electric Cooperative, Inc.. (Barber, Mark) |
Filing 6 NOTICE of Appearance by Brandon Todd Holmes on behalf of Sumter Electric Cooperative, Inc. (Holmes, Brandon) |
Filing 5 ENDORSED ORDER granting #4 Consent Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to Complaint. Defendant's deadline to respond to the Complaint is extended to March 5, 2021. Signed by Judge James S. Moody, Jr. on 2/19/2021. (SMB) |
Filing 4 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer or other Response to Complaint by Mobile Energy Inc. (Sipple, Martin) |
Filing 3 NOTICE of Local Rule 1.07(c), Local Rule 3.02(a)(2), and Local Rule 3.03. -Local Rule 1.07(c) requires lead counsel to promptly file a Notice of a Related Action that identifies and describes any related action pending in the Middle District. -Local Rule 3.02(a)(2) requires the parties in every civil proceeding, except those described in subsection (d), to file a case management report (CMR) using the uniform form at www.flmd.uscourts.gov. The CMR must be filed (1) within forty days after any defendant appears in an action originating in this court, (2) within forty days after the docketing of an action removed or transferred to this court, or (3) within seventy days after service on the United States attorney in an action against the United States, its agencies or employees. Judges may have a special CMR form for certain types of cases. These forms can be found at www.flmd.uscourts.gov under the Forms tab for each judge. -Local Rule 3.03 requires each party to file a disclosure statement with the first appearance that identifies (1) each person that has or might have an interest in the outcome, (2) each entity with publicly traded shares or debt potentially affected by the outcome, (3) each additional entity likely to actively participate, and (4) each person arguably eligible for restitution. The disclosure statement must include this certification - I certify that, except as disclosed, I am unaware of an actual or potential conflict of interest affecting the district judge or the magistrate judge in this action, and I will immediately notify the judge in writing within fourteen days after I know of a conflict. (SMB) |
Filing 2 NEW CASE ASSIGNED to Judge James S. Moody, Jr and Magistrate Judge Philip R. Lammens. New case number: 5:21-cv-0095-JSM-PRL. (SJB) |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT and NOTICE OF REMOVAL from United States District Court, Middle District of Florida, Ocala Division, case number 2021-CA-000059 filed in State Court on January 28, 2021. Filing fee $ 402, receipt number 113A-17895732 filed by All Defendants. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Exhibit, #3 Exhibit)(Sipple, Martin) |
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 Florida Middle 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: Sumter Electric Cooperative, Inc. v. Mobile Energy Inc | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Plaintiff: Sumter Electric Cooperative, Inc. | |
Represented By: | Mark Monroe Barber |
Represented By: | Brandon Todd Holmes |
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: Mobile Energy Inc | |
Represented By: | Martin B. Sipple |
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.