Satterfield v. ENO, Inc.
| FRED SATTERFIELD |
| ENO, INC. AN ILLINOIS DOMESTIC BCA CORPORATION DOING BUSINESS IN FLORIDA and ENO, INC. |
| 5:2022cv00298 |
| June 29, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Middle District of Florida |
| John Antoon |
| Philip R Lammens |
| Labor: Fair Standards |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination |
| Both |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 6, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 18 ANSWER to court interrogatories re: #9 Case Management / FLSA / ADA / Social Security / Scheduling Order by Fred Satterfield. (Hunt, Daniel) |
| Filing 17 MOTION to Compel Plaintiff to Serve Amended Answers to Court's Interrogatories (#7, 9, 10, 11 & 12) by ENO, INC.. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1)(Lerebours, Emeraude) Motions referred to Magistrate Judge Philip R. Lammens. |
| Filing 16 VERIFIED summary by ENO, INC.. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A)(Hayden, Brian) |
| Filing 15 Defendant's ANSWER and affirmative defenses with Jury Demand to #13 Amended Complaint by ENO, INC..(Hayden, Brian) |
Filing 14
ORDER denying as moot #5 Motion to Dismiss. Signed by Judge John Antoon II on 7/25/2022. (AKC)
|
| Filing 13 AMENDED COMPLAINT against ENO, INC. with Jury Demand. filed by Fred Satterfield.(Hunt, Daniel) |
| Filing 12 ANSWER to court interrogatories re: #9 Case Management / FLSA / ADA / Social Security / Scheduling Order by Fred Satterfield. (Hunt, Daniel) Modified on 7/11/2022 (MJT). |
| Filing 11 NOTICE of Appearance by Daniel Harrison Hunt on behalf of Fred Satterfield (Hunt, Daniel) |
| Filing 10 CERTIFICATE of interested persons and corporate disclosure statement by Fred Satterfield. (Hunt, Daniel) |
|
Filing 9
FLSA SCHEDULING ORDER. Signed by Magistrate Judge Philip R. Lammens on 7/1/2022. (MJT)
|
| Filing 8 CERTIFICATE of interested persons and corporate disclosure statement by ENO, INC.. (Hayden, Brian) |
| Filing 7 NOTICE of Appearance by Emeraude Lerebours on behalf of ENO, INC. (Lerebours, Emeraude) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE of a related action per Local Rule 1.07(c) by ENO, INC. Related case(s): Yes. (Hayden, Brian) Modified on 7/1/2022 (LAB). |
| Filing 5 MOTION to Dismiss Count II of Plaintiff's Complaint by ENO, INC.. (Hayden, Brian) |
|
Filing 4
ORDER OF REFERENCE to the Magistrate Judge. Signed by Judge John Antoon II on 6/30/2022. (AKC)
|
|
Filing 3
INITIAL CASE ORDER (FLSA) directing counsel to file a Disclosure Statement within 14 days from the date of this order; file a notice of pendency if there is a related case within 14 days from the date of this order; waiving requirement for a case management report. Signed by Judge John Antoon II on 6/30/2022. (AKC)
|
| Filing 2 NEW CASE ASSIGNED to Judge John Antoon II and Magistrate Judge Philip R. Lammens. New case number: 5:22-cv-0298-JA-PRL. (SJB) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT and NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Fifth Judicial Circuit, Marion County, case number 22-CA-000969 filed in State Court on 05/17/2022. Filing fee $402, receipt number AFLMDC-19722333 filed by ENO, INC., An Illinois Domestic BCA Corporation doing business in Florida. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Composite Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit C, #4 State Court COMPLAINT State Court Complaint, #5 State Court Docket Sheet State Court Docket, #6 State Court Other Documents State Court Other Documents, #7 Civil Cover Sheet Civil Cover Sheet)(Hayden, Brian) Modified on 6/30/2022 (LAB). |
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
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.
