Luckoo v. Verizon
Patricia R. Luckoo |
Verizon |
1:2019cv04362 |
June 28, 2019 |
US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
Edmond E Chang |
Civil Rights: Jobs |
42 U.S.C. ยง 1981 |
None |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on February 26, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 11 COMPLAINT filed by Patricia R. Luckoo; Jury Demand (Exhibits). (aee, ) |
Filing 10 ORDER: Based on financial indigency, Plaintiff's application #3 to proceed in forma pauperis is granted. The Clerk shall issue summons for service as to Defendant Verizon. The United States Marshals Service is appointed to serve Defendant using the USM-285 form, R. 7. The Marshals Service may seek a waiver of service under Rule 4(d)(1)(G). For now, Plaintiff's motion #4 for attorney representation is denied, though without prejudice. Plaintiff has earned a doctorate degree, R. 4 at 2, and drafted a factually detailed complaint. At this early stage of the case, she can handle the litigation. This denial is without prejudice to renewing the motion later. To track the progress of service only (no appearance is required), a status hearing is set for 04/08/2020 at 8:30 a.m. Signed by the Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 2/26/2020. Mailed notice (aee, ) |
SUMMONS Issued, certified copy of order dated 02/26/2020 to the U.S. Marshal's Office for service as to defendant Verizon via email. (aee, ) |
Filing 9 RESPONSE by Plaintiff Patricia R. Luckoo motion to mandatory initial discovery (las, ) |
Filing 8 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. (gcy, ) |
Filing 5 PRO SE Appearance by Plaintiff Patricia R. Luckoo. (gcy, ) |
Filing 4 MOTION by Plaintiff Patricia R. Luckoo for attorney representation. (gcy, ) |
Filing 3 APPLICATION by Plaintiff Patricia R. Luckoo for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and affidavit. (gcy, ) |
Filing 2 CIVIL Cover Sheet. (gcy, ) |
Filing 1 RECEIVED Complaint and 1 copy by Patricia R. Luckoo. (Attachments). (gcy, ) |
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: Luckoo v. Verizon | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Plaintiff: Patricia R. Luckoo | |
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: Verizon | |
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.