Shamoun v. Niles Township District 219
| Stella Shamoun |
| Niles Township District 219 and Niles Township High School District 219 |
| 1:2018cv04975 |
| July 20, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| Chicago Office |
| Cook |
| John Robert Blakey |
| Civil Rights: Jobs |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 451 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 6, 2018. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 13 MINUTE entry before the Honorable John Robert Blakey: Status hearing held on 9/6/2018. Initial MIDP discovery shall be completed on or before 9/20/2018. Case management conference set for 10/3/2018 at 10:15 a.m. in Courtroom 1203. Mailed notice (gel, ) |
| Filing 12 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Niles Township High School District 219 by Frank Bennett Garrett, III (Garrett, Frank) |
| Filing 11 STATUS Report Initial Joint Status Report by Stella Shamoun (Abraham, Christina) |
| Filing 10 Defendant's ANSWER to Complaint by Niles Township High School District 219(Bohman, Tyler) |
| Filing 9 AFFIDAVIT of Service filed by Plaintiff Stella Shamoun regarding Summons & Complaint served on Ray Chung on 7/31/2018 (Abraham, Christina) |
| Filing 8 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Niles Township High School District 219 by Katelin J. Eastman (Eastman, Katelin) |
| Filing 7 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Niles Township High School District 219 by Tyler Jon Bohman (Bohman, Tyler) |
| Filing 6 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Niles Township High School District 219 by Joseph James Perkoski (Perkoski, Joseph) |
| SUMMONS Issued as to Defendant Niles Township High School District 219 (yt) |
| Filing 5 MINUTE entry before the Honorable John Robert Blakey: This case has been assigned to the calendar of the Honorable John Robert Blakey. Pursuant to General Order 17-0005, this case falls within the Mandatory Initial Discovery Pilot (MIDP) Project, and the "Standing Order in MIDP Cases" now governs the conduct of the litigants in this matter. Under the MIDP, this Court shall enforce the MIDP Standing Order via the Court's inherent authority (including the contempt of court power) and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Consequently, both the parties and their attorneys are hereby ordered to review and fully comply with the MIDP Standing Order, which is available on the Court's homepage: http://www.ilnd.uscourts.gov/_assets/_documents/MIDP%20Standing%20Order.pdf. The parties are further advised that in light of the MIDP's intended goal of reducing the traditional cost and delay of federal civil litigation, this Court will not grant routine motions for extensions of time to meet the deadlines imposed by the MIDP Standing Order (even agreed motions made jointly by the parties). During the course of the litigation, the attorneys must also appear at all hearing dates set by the Court or noticed by the parties. If an attorney has a conflict with a set court date, the attorney must notify Judge Blakey's Courtroom Deputy, Gloria Lewis, at (312) 818-6699. If appropriate, the Court will then reset the matter. Advising opposing counsel of a scheduling conflict is not a substitute for communicating directly with the Court. The litigants are further ordered to review and fully comply with all of this Court's own standing orders, which are available on Judge Blakey's information page on the Court's official website: http://www.ilnd.uscourts.gov/. An initial status conference is hereby set for 9/6/2018 at 9:45 a.m. in Courtroom 1203. At the status conference, the Court will discuss the MIDP and ask the parties questions to verify that they have reviewed and complied with the MIDP Standing Order. Without exception, the parties must also file a status report no later than 8/27/2018, using the model template set forth in this Courts standing order regarding Initial (or Reassignment) Status Conferences. Failure by any party to file the status report by the requisite deadline (either jointly or, if necessary, individually with an explanation as to why a joint report could not be filed) may result in a summary dismissal of the case for failure to prosecute, or an entry of default against any served defendant(s) failing to comply with this order. Mailed notice (gel, ) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE TO THE PARTIES - The Court is participating in the Mandatory Initial Discovery Pilot (MIDP). The key features and deadlines are set forth in this Notice which includes a link to the (MIDP) Standing Order and a Checklist for use by the parties. In cases subject to the pilot, all parties must respond to the mandatory initial discovery requests set forth in the Standing Order before initiating any further discovery in this case. Please note: The discovery obligations in the Standing Order supersede the disclosures required by Rule 26(a)(1). Any party seeking affirmative relief must serve a copy of the following documents (Notice of Mandatory Initial Discovery and the Standing Order) on each new party when the Complaint, Counterclaim, Crossclaim, or Third-Party Complaint is served. (eaa, ) |
| Filing 3 CIVIL Cover Sheet (Abraham, Christina) |
| Filing 2 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Stella Shamoun by Christina W. Abraham (Abraham, Christina) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT filed by Stella Shamoun; jury demand. Filing fee $ 400, receipt number 0752-14725806. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A)(Abraham, Christina) |
| CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable John Robert Blakey. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable M. David Weisman. (rc, ) |
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 Illinois Northern 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.
