Hartney v. Sharp
| David Hartney |
| Thaxter Sharp |
| 1:2019cv00241 |
| January 11, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| John Robert Blakey |
| Contract: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on February 20, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 8 MINUTE entry before the Honorable John Robert Blakey: On the Court's own motion, the initial status conference previously set for 2/21/19 is stricken and reset for 3/12/19 at 9:45 a.m. in Courtroom 1203. Mailed notice (gel, ) |
| Filing 7 STATUS Report by David Hartney (Jayaram, Vivek) |
| Filing 6 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 Courts official website: http://www.ilnd.uscourts.gov/. An initial status conference is hereby set for 2/21/2019 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 2/11/2019, using the model template set forth in this Court's 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 5 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff David Hartney by Vivek Jayaram (Jayaram, Vivek) |
| Filing 4 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff David Hartney by Vivek Jayaram (Jayaram, Vivek) |
| Filing 3 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. (kp, ) |
| Filing 2 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff David Hartney by Brett Adam Manchel (Manchel, Brett) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT filed by David Hartney; Filing fee $ 400, receipt number 0752-15364751. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet Civil Cover Sheet)(Jayaram, Vivek) |
| CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable John Robert Blakey. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Sunil R. Harjani. Case assignment: Random assignment. (kb, ) |
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
| Search for this case: Hartney v. Sharp | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: David Hartney | |
| Represented By: | Vivek Jayaram |
| Represented By: | Brett Adam Manchel |
| 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: Thaxter Sharp | |
| 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.
