Sprull et al v. TRT Transportation, Inc., et al
| Valencia Jean Sprull and Monica Sprull |
| Windy City Duck Tours, Chicago Ducks Tours, Coach USA Chicago, Chicago Trolley Company, TRT TRANSPORTATION, INC. D/B/A CHICAGO TROLLEY CO., Chicago Trolly Company, Chicago Trolley and Double Decker Company, Chicago's Original Duck Tours, Bob Cabana, Coach USA, Variant Equity Advisors, Explore Store, Chicago Trolley & Double Decker Co, Unknown Employee, Cabana Bob and TRT Transportation, Inc. |
| 1:2019cv04350 |
| June 27, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| Thomas M Durkin |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1981 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on July 29, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| SUMMONS Issued as to Defendant Unknown Employee (jjr, ) |
| SUMMONS Issued as to Defendant Chicago Trolley & Double Decker Co (mc, ) |
| Filing 5 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. (aee, ) |
| SUMMONS Issued as to Defendants Chicago Ducks Tours, Chicago Trolley Company, Chicago Trolley and Double Decker Company, Chicago Trolly Company, Chicago's Original Duck Tours, Coach USA, Coach USA Chicago, Explore Store, TRT Transportation, Inc., Variant Equity Advisors, Windy City Duck Tours (lma, ) |
| 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. (aee, ) |
Filing 3
ORDER: Joint status report due by 8/30/2019. Status hearing set for 9/5/2019 at 09:00 AM. Signed by the Honorable Thomas M. Durkin on 7/2/2019:Mailed notice(srn, )
|
| Filing 2 CIVIL Cover Sheet (Gilmartin, Michael) |
| CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Thomas M. Durkin. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Sunil R. Harjani. Case assignment: Random assignment. (kb, ) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT filed by Valencia Jean Sprull, Monica Sprull; Jury Demand. Filing fee $ 400, receipt number 0752-15977773. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit IL SOS Printout)(Gilmartin, Michael) |
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.
