Randolph v. City of Chicago et al
| Shontaa Randolph |
| David Taylor, Star No. 18525, Timothy Loring, Star No. 4769, Erik Haney, Star No. 3591, City of Chicago, Sylwia Rejman, Star No. 4502, D. Meeks, Star No. 16730, Ryan McCarthy, Star No. 6750, Sylwia Rejman, David Taylor, Erik Haney, Ryan McCarthy, Timothy Loring and D. Meeks |
| 1:2019cv07704 |
| November 21, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| John J Tharp |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Both |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on January 17, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 11 JOINT ANSWER to Complaint with Jury Demand and Affirmative Defenses by City of Chicago, Erik Haney, Timothy Loring, Ryan McCarthy, D. Meeks, Sylwia Rejman, David Taylor(Winistorfer, Mark) |
| Filing 10 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendants Erik Haney, Timothy Loring, Ryan McCarthy, D. Meeks, Sylwia Rejman, David Taylor by Mark David Winistorfer (Winistorfer, Mark) |
| Filing 9 MINUTE entry before the Honorable John J. Tharp, Jr:The defendant's unopposed motion for an extension of time to answer #7 is granted. All defendants' answers are now due 1/20/20. No appearance on the motion is required. This case is set for an initial status conference on 2/4/20 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 1/28/20. Mailed notice (air, ) |
| Filing 8 UNOPPOSED NOTICE of Motion by Mark David Winistorfer for presentment of extension of time #7 before Honorable John J. Tharp Jr. on 12/31/2019 at 09:00 AM. (Winistorfer, Mark) |
| Filing 7 MOTION by Defendant City of Chicago for extension of time UNOPPOSED (Winistorfer, Mark) |
| Filing 6 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant City of Chicago by Mark David Winistorfer (Winistorfer, Mark) |
| Filing 5 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant City of Chicago by Nathan A. Shine (Shine, Nathan) |
| 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. (jh, ) |
| Filing 3 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Shontaa Randolph by Edward M. Fox (Fox, Edward) |
| Filing 2 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Shontaa Randolph by Garrett W. Browne (Browne, Garrett) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT filed by Shontaa Randolph; Jury Demand. Filing fee $ 400, receipt number 0752-16465745. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Browne, Garrett) |
| CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable John J. Tharp, Jr. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Maria Valdez. Case assignment: Random assignment. (txl, ) |
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.
