SAVILLE v. ADDAY INC
| Brittany Saville |
| Adday, Inc. d/b/a IHOP #434 and ADDAY INC doing business as IHOP #434 |
| ADDAY INC |
| 3:2021cv00011 |
| February 5, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Middle District of Georgia |
| C ASHLEY ROYAL |
| Labor: Family and Medical Leave Act |
| 29 U.S.C. § 2601 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 31, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 15
REPLY to Response filed by ADDAY INC re #6 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM (Fuchs, Dean)
|
|
Filing 14
This is a text only entry; no document issued. ORDER granting #11 Unopposed Motion to Stay Pretrial Deadlines and Discovery. All pretrial deadlines and discovery in this case are hereby STAYED until the Court issues its ruling on #6 Defendant's Motion to Dismiss. Ordered by U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE C. ASHLEY ROYAL on 3/25/2021. (ssh)
|
|
Filing 13
RESPONSE filed by BRITTANY SAVILLE re #6 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM (HERMAN, ZANE)
|
|
Filing 12
ANSWER to #8 Answer to Complaint, Counterclaim by BRITTANY SAVILLE. Related document: #8 Answer to Complaint, Counterclaim filed by ADDAY INC.(HERMAN, ZANE)
|
|
Filing 11
UNOPPOSED MOTION to Stay Pretrial Deadlines and Discovery by ADDAY INC filed by Dean R. Fuchs.(Fuchs, Dean)
|
|
Filing 10
SUMMONS Returned Executed by BRITTANY SAVILLE as to ADDAY INC. (HERMAN, ZANE)
|
|
Filing 9
RULES 16/26 ORDER: Proposed Scheduling/Discovery order due by 4/1/2021. Ordered by US DISTRICT JUDGE C ASHLEY ROYAL on 03/02/21. (Attachments: #1 Required Form)(ans)
|
|
Filing 8
ANSWER to Complaint, COUNTERCLAIM against BRITTANY SAVILLE by ADDAY INC.(Fuchs, Dean)
|
|
Filing 7
Corporate Disclosure Statement by ADDAY INC (Fuchs, Dean)
|
|
Notice of Deficiency (related document(s): #6 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim filed by ADDAY INC ); Pursuant to Local Rule 87.1, all nongovernmental corporate parties must file a Corporate Disclosure Statement. Please file the required corporate disclosures immediately.(ggs)
|
|
Filing 6
MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM by ADDAY INC filed by Dean R. Fuchs. (Attachments: #1 Memorandum in Support Memorandum in Support)(Fuchs, Dean)
|
|
Filing 5
Order granting Petition for Admission Pro Hac Vice (Petition Attached); Attorney Admission Fee Met by ZANE HERMAN (nop)
|
|
Filing 4
PETITION TO THE CLERK FOR ADMISSION TO PLEAD AND PRACTICE PRO HAC VICE by BRITTANY SAVILLE Attorney Admission Fee (Pro Hac Vice) paid by Receipt # AGAMDC-3706102, $100. LOCAL COUNSEL Name and Georgia Bar #: Gary Martoccio 497511. (Attachments: #1 Certificate of Good Standing)(MARTOCCIO, GARY)
|
|
Filing 3
Corporate Disclosure Statement by BRITTANY SAVILLE (MARTOCCIO, GARY)
|
|
Filing 2
Summons Issued as to ADDAY INC. (ggs)
|
|
Notice of Deficiency (related document(s): #1 Complaint, filed by Brittany Saville ); Parties were added using punctuation AND/OR title capitalization. The case opening guide states ***REMINDER*** all parties must be added using ALL CAPS (ie LISA SMITH or DELTA AIRLINES). Do not use ANY punctuation when adding new parties. For instructions on adding parties, please refer to the Style Guide located on the website for the Middle District of Georgia. NO NEED TO REFILE.(ggs)
|
|
Filing 1
COMPLAINT against Adday, Inc. d/b/a IHOP #434 Fee paid: Receipt # AGAMDC-3705285, $402 filed by Brittany Saville (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A-Right to Sue, #2 Civil Cover Sheet, #3 Summons)(MARTOCCIO, GARY)
|
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 Georgia 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.
