Pinkston v. The Board of Education of the City of Chicago et al
| Yvonne Pinkston |
| Cynthia Miller, City Of Chicago, Maurice Polk, Pamela Smith and The Board of Education of the City of Chicago |
| 1:2019cv06477 |
| September 30, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| John J Tharp |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 2, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 11
MINUTE entry before the Honorable John J. Tharp, Jr:The unopposed motion for extension of time to answer or otherwise plead #8 is granted. No appearance on the motion is required. Defendant the Board of Education of the City of Chicago's answer or responsive pleading is now due 1/3/2020. This case is set for an initial status conference on 1/16/20 at 9:00 a.m. The parties are directed to review the procedures for initial status conferences, located at [https://www.ilnd.uscourts.gov/judge-info.aspx?79eF+7uiX7ewBj/ITKrjoA==], and to submit the required initial status report no later than 1/10/20. Mailed notice (air, )
|
|
Filing 10
WAIVER OF SERVICE returned executed by Yvonne Pinkston. The Board of Education of the City of Chicago waiver sent on 9/30/2019, answer due 11/29/2019. (Herbert, Daniel)
|
|
Filing 9
NOTICE of Motion by Elizabeth Kathleen Barton for presentment of motion for extension of time to file answer #8 before Honorable John J. Tharp Jr. on 11/21/2019 at 09:00 AM. (Barton, Elizabeth)
|
|
Filing 8
MOTION by Defendant The Board of Education of the City of Chicago for extension of time to file answer or otherwise plead (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A)(Barton, Elizabeth)
|
|
Filing 7
ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant The Board of Education of the City of Chicago by Angela Rose Huisingh (Huisingh, Angela)
|
|
Filing 6
ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant The Board of Education of the City of Chicago by Elizabeth Kathleen Barton (Barton, Elizabeth)
|
|
Filing 5
ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Yvonne Pinkston by Daniel Q Herbert (Herbert, Daniel)
|
|
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. (nsf, )
|
|
Filing 3
ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Yvonne Pinkston by Kelly Ann Krauchun (Krauchun, Kelly)
|
|
Filing 2
CIVIL Cover Sheet (Herbert, Daniel)
|
|
Filing 1
COMPLAINT filed by Yvonne Pinkston; Jury Demand. Filing fee $ 400, receipt number 0752-16287810. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit Exhibit B, #3 Notice of Filing)(Herbert, Daniel)
|
|
CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable John J. Tharp, Jr. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable M. David Weisman. Case assignment: Random assignment. (td, )
|
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.
