Smythe et al v. Saffeels et al
| Ronda Smythe, Liana P Kanno and Liana P. Kanno |
| Brandon Charles Saffeels, County of Maui, Jane Does 1-10, John Does 1-10, Doe Corporations 1-10, Doe Partnerships 1-10, Doe Entities 1-10 and Brandon Saffeels |
| 1:2021cv00056 |
| January 22, 2021 |
| US District Court for the District of Hawaii |
| LESLIE E KOBAYASHI |
| ROM TRADER |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1446 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on June 3, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 9 MOTION to Dismiss for failure to State a Claim Keola Robert Whittaker appearing for Defendant County of Maui (Attachments: #1 Memorandum in Support of Motions, #2 Declaration of Keola R. Whittaker, #3 Declaration of Kathy L. Kaohu, #4 Certificate of Service)(Whittaker, Keola) |
| Filing 8 DEMAND for Trial by Jury. (Attachments: #1 Certificate of Service)(Smith, Paul) |
| Filing 7 First AMENDED COMPLAINT against All Defendants, filed by Liana P. Kanno, Ronda Smythe. (Attachments: #1 Certificate of Service)(Smith, Paul) |
| Filing 6 EO: On 3/4/21, the parties submitted to the Court a First Stipulation Authorizing Plaintiffs to File a First Amended Complaint ("Stipulation"). Because the parties submitted a Stipulation, it appears that they intended to allow Plaintiffs to amend their Complaint pursuant to FRCP 15(a)(2). However, Defendant Brandon Saffeels, who has been served a copy of the Notice of Removal and Complaint [ECF #1 ] in this case, did not sign the Stipulation. Accordingly, the Court cannot approve the Stipulation unless all defendants in this action have given their written consent to the First Amended Complaint. The parties may resolve this deficiency and resubmit the Stipulation for the Courts consideration. Alternatively, if Plaintiffs seek to amend as a matter of course pursuant to FRCP 15(a)(1), a redlined version of the First Amended Complaint is not necessary and they may file the First Amended Complaint without a Stipulation. (MAGISTRATE JUDGE ROM TRADER)(laa) |
| Filing 5 EO: The Telephonic Rule 16 Scheduling Conference set for 2/22/2021 is CONTINUED to 4/27/2021 at 09:00AM before MAGISTRATE JUDGE ROM TRADER. Parties and other participants must call-in at least five (5) minutes prior to the scheduled start time of the conference. Call-in instructions are below:1. Dial 1-888-363-4735.2. Access Code 2070326. (MAGISTRATE JUDGE ROM TRADER)(laa) |
Filing 4
FIRST STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME FOR DEFENDANT MAUI COUNTY POLICE DEPARTMENT TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFFS' COMPLAINT; ORDER - Signed by MAGISTRATE JUDGE ROM TRADER on 2/2/2021. County of Maui answer due 3/4/2021. (emt, )
|
|
Filing 3
Order Setting Telephonic Rule 16 Scheduling Conference for 09:00 AM on 2/22/2021 before MAGISTRATE JUDGE ROM TRADER - Signed by CHIEF JUDGE J. MICHAEL SEABRIGHT on 1/22/2021. (Attachments: #1 Memo from the Clerk Re: Corporate Disclosure Statements) ATTACH THE ORDER SETTING RULE 16 SCHEDULING CONFERENCE TO THE INITIATING DOCUMENT (COMPLAINT/NOTICE OF REMOVAL). THE ORDER AND MEMO RE: CORPORATE DISCLOSURES MUST BE SERVED WITH THE DOCUMENT.(jo)
|
| Filing 2 NOTICE of Case Assignment: Please reflect Civil case number CV 21-00056 LEK-RT on all further pleadings. (jo) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL by County of Maui from Circuit Court of the Second Circuit, case number 2CCV-20-0000208. ( Filing fee $ 402 receipt number 0975-2475089), filed by County of Maui. (Attachments: #1 Demand for Jury Trial, #2 Exhibit "A", #3 Certificate of Service)(Whittaker, Keola) |
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 Hawaii 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.
