Medgebow v. CHECKERS DRIVE-IN RESTAURANTS INC.
| Joel Medgebow |
| Checkers Drive-In Restaurants Inc |
| 9:2019cv80090 |
| January 23, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Florida |
| Beth Bloom |
| Bruce E Reinhart |
| Other Statutory Actions |
| 47 U.S.C. ยง 0151 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 18, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Set/Reset Answer Due Deadline as per DE 7 : Checkers Drive-In Restaurants Inc response due 4/29/2019. (lk) |
| Set/Reset Deadlines/Hearings as per DE 7 : Joint Scheduling Report due by 5/6/2019 (lk) |
Filing 7
PAPERLESS ORDER granting in part and denying in part #6 Motion to Stay. The case is stayed until April 22, 2019, to allow the parties to resolve the case. If not resolved, the Defendant shall file its Answer by April 29, 2019, and the parties shall file their Joint Scheduling Report by May 6, 2019. Signed by Judge Beth Bloom (BB)
|
| Filing 6 Joint MOTION to Stay re #4 Order Requiring Joint Scheduling Report Pending Mediation by Joel Medgebow. Responses due by 3/29/2019 (Eggnatz, Joshua) |
| Filing 5 WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed by Joel Medgebow. Checkers Drive-In Restaurants Inc waiver sent on 1/24/2019, answer due 3/25/2019. (Eggnatz, Joshua) |
|
Filing 4
ORDER REQUIRING SCHEDULING REPORT AND CERTIFICATES OF INTERESTED PARTIES. Signed by Judge Beth Bloom on 1/23/2019. See attached document for full details. (ar2)
|
| Filing 3 Summons Issued as to Checkers Drive-In Restaurants Inc. (jao) |
| Filing 2 Clerks Notice of Judge Assignment to Judge Beth Bloom and Magistrate Judge Bruce E. Reinhart. Pursuant to 28 USC 636(c), the parties are hereby notified that the U.S. Magistrate Judge Bruce E. Reinhart 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. (jao) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Checkers Drive-In Restaurants Inc. Filing fees $ 400.00 receipt number 113C-11333980, filed by Joel Medgebow. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Summon(s))(Eggnatz, Joshua) |
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: Medgebow v. CHECKERS DRIVE-IN RESTAURANTS INC. | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Joel Medgebow | |
| Represented By: | Michael James Pascucci |
| Represented By: | Joshua Harris Eggnatz |
| Represented By: | Seth Michael Lehrman |
| 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: Checkers Drive-In Restaurants Inc | |
| 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.
