Hall v. Rosenbarun et al
| Dr. Gregory Hall and Gregory Hall |
| Officer Rosenbarun, City Of Evanston, Officer Ozafzelske, Mary Poe, John Doe, The City of Evanston, Illinois and John Roe |
| 1:2019cv00417 |
| January 21, 2019 |
| U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| Edmond E Chang |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 18, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 9 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Status hearing held. Plaintiff appeared and reported that his counsel was stuck in traffic conditions. Plaintiff's counsel also alerted the Court that he would be unable to appear due to traffic conditions. Defense counsel reported that she provided police reports identifying all the officers involved in the incident. By 04/01/2019, Plaintiff shall file an amended complaint identifying the Doe Defendants. Plaintiff shall send waivers of service to defense counsel. Defendants' answer to the amended complaint due 04/22/2109. By 04/08/2019, Plaintiff shall issue non-party subpoenas for medical records. Status hearing set for 05/07/2019 at 9:30 a.m.Emailed notice (slb, ) |
| Filing 8 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Gregory Hall by Mary Johanna Grieb (Grieb, Mary) |
| Filing 7 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Gregory Hall by Abby Dana Bakos (Bakos, Abby) |
| Filing 6 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Gregory Hall by Brendan Shiller (Shiller, Brendan) |
| Filing 5 STATUS Report by The City of Evanston, Illinois (Benson, Victoria) |
| Filing 4 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant The City of Evanston, Illinois by Victoria Rose Benson (Benson, Victoria) |
| Filing 3 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Initial status hearing for 03/18/2019 at 9:00 a.m. The parties must file a joint initial status report with the content described in the attached status report requirements at least 3 business days before the initial status hearing. Plaintiff must still file the report even if not all Defendants have been served or have responded to requests to craft a joint report. Because the Procedures are occasionally revised, counsel must read them anew even if counsel has appeared before Judge Chang in other cases.Emailed notice (Attachments: #1 Status Report Requirements) (slb, ) |
| Filing 2 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. (tt, ) |
| CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Edmond E. Chang. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Sidney I. Schenkier. Case assignment: Random assignment. (jjr, ) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT 19-cv-00417 filed by Gregory Hall; Jury Demand. Filing fee $ 400, receipt number 0752-15396703. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Willis, Standish) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. 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.
