Rae et al v. THE HOME DEPOT U.S.A., INC. et al
| Melanie Rae and Alan S Rae |
| Rich Myers and THE HOME DEPOT U.S.A., INC. |
| 9:2020cv81724 |
| September 23, 2020 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Florida |
| Rodney Smith |
| P.I.: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 |
| Defendant |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 19, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 11 RESPONSE in Opposition re #10 First MOTION to Strike #7 Answer to Amended Complaint Fabre Defense and Home Depot's Motion for Sanctions filed by THE HOME DEPOT U.S.A., INC.. Replies due by 11/30/2020. (Brooks, Jennifer) |
| Filing 10 First MOTION to Strike #7 Answer to Amended Complaint Fabre Defense by Alan S Rae, Melanie Rae. Responses due by 11/19/2020 (Kuvin, Spencer) |
| Filing 9 RESPONSE in Opposition re #6 First MOTION to Remand and for Attorney's Fees and Costs filed by THE HOME DEPOT U.S.A., INC.. Replies due by 11/4/2020. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Third Amended Complaint, #2 Exhibit Order)(Brooks, Jennifer) |
| Filing 8 Defendant's MOTION to Dismiss with Prejudice #5 Amended Complaint/Amended Notice of Removal by Rich Myers. Responses due by 11/10/2020 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Third Amended Complaint, #2 Exhibit Order)(Brooks, Jennifer) |
| Filing 7 Home Depot's Answer and Affirmative Defenses to Plaintiffs' Third Amended Complaint ANSWER and Affirmative Defenses to Amended Complaint with Jury Demand by THE HOME DEPOT U.S.A., INC.. (Brooks, Jennifer) |
| Filing 6 First MOTION to Remand by Alan S Rae, Melanie Rae. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Order on Motion to Dismiss, #2 Exhibit Return of Service on Meyers, #3 Exhibit Sedgwick Offer Letter)(Kuvin, Spencer) |
| Filing 5 Third AMENDED COMPLAINT against Rich Myers, THE HOME DEPOT U.S.A., INC. filed in response to Order Granting Motion for Leave, filed by Alan S Rae, Melanie Rae.(Kuvin, Spencer) |
| SYSTEM ENTRY - Docket Entry 4 [misc] restricted/sealed until further notice. (766966) |
Filing 3
PAPERLESS ORDER REGARDING #1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL: No later than October 8, 2020, Defendant, The Home Depot U.S.A., Inc., shall file (1) documents in support of its Notice of Removal under seal, to the extent it contends those documents contain confidential information, or (2) an affidavit or a declaration, showing that the amount in controversy necessary for diversity jurisdiction is met. Signed by Judge Rodney Smith on 10/1/2020. (lbn)
|
| Filing 2 Clerks Notice of Judge Assignment to Judge Rodney Smith. Pursuant to 28 USC 636(c), the parties are hereby notified that the U.S. Magistrate Judge William Matthewman 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. (pes) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL (STATE COURT COMPLAINT - Complaint) Filing fee $ 400.00 receipt number AFLSDC-13572112, filed by Rich Myers, THE HOME DEPOT U.S.A., INC.. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Complaint, #2 Exhibit Return of Service, #3 Exhibit Order, #4 Exhibit State Court Docket, #5 Exhibit Sunbiz, #6 Civil Cover Sheet Civil Cover Sheet)(Brooks, Jennifer) |
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
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.
