Gomez v. Hillstone Restaurant Group, Inc.
| Andres Gomez |
| Hillstone Restaurant Group, Inc. |
| 1:2019cv23066 |
| July 24, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Florida |
| Jose E Martinez |
| Civil Rights: Americans with Disabilities - Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 12182 |
| Defendant |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 9, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 8
FINAL ORDER of DISMISSAL re #7 Stipulation of Dismissal; Dismissing Action with prejudice; Closing Case. Signed by Judge Jose E. Martinez on 9/9/2019. See attached document for full details. (ls)
|
| Filing 7 STIPULATION of Dismissal by Andres Gomez (Attachments: #1 Text of Proposed Order)(Leal, Alberto) |
| Filing 6 ANSWER and Affirmative Defenses to Complaint with Jury Demand by Hillstone Restaurant Group, Inc.. Attorney Nelson Camilo Bellido added to party Hillstone Restaurant Group, Inc.(pty:dft). (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit C, #4 Exhibit D)(Bellido, Nelson) |
|
Filing 5
Order Requiring Joint Scheduling Report. Signed by Judge Jose E. Martinez on 7/31/2019. See attached document for full details. (dq)
|
| Filing 4 SUMMONS (Affidavit) Returned Executed on #1 Complaint with a 21 day response/answer filing deadline pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12 by Andres Gomez. Hillstone Restaurant Group, Inc. served on 7/25/2019, answer due 8/15/2019. (Leal, Alberto) |
| Filing 3 Summons Issued as to Hillstone Restaurant Group, Inc.. (amb) |
| Filing 2 Clerks Notice of Judge Assignment to Judge Jose E. Martinez. Pursuant to 28 USC 636(c), the parties are hereby notified that the U.S. Magistrate Judge Alicia M. Otazo-Reyes is available to handle any or all proceedings in this case. If agreed, parties should complete and file the Consent form found on our website. It is not necessary to file a document indicating lack of consent. Pro se (NON-PRISONER) litigants may receive Notices of Electronic Filings (NEFS) via email after filing a Consent by Pro Se Litigant (NON-PRISONER) to Receive Notices of Electronic Filing. The consent form is available under the forms section of our website. (amb) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Hillstone Restaurant Group, Inc.. Filing fees $ 400.00 receipt number 113C-11839614, filed by Andres Gomez. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Summon(s) Hillstone Restaurant Group, Inc.)(Leal, Alberto) |
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 Southern 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: Gomez v. Hillstone Restaurant Group, Inc. | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Andres Gomez | |
| Represented By: | Alberto R. Leal |
| Represented By: | Douglas Steven Schapiro |
| 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: Hillstone Restaurant Group, Inc. | |
| Represented By: | Nelson Camilo Bellido |
| 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.
