Conlisk v. WalMart, Inc.
| John Conlisk |
| WalMart, Inc. |
| 1:2021cv04604 |
| August 27, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| Edmond E Chang |
| P.I.: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 21, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 7 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: The parties failed to file the status report due on 10/13/2021. R. 4. The parties shall file the status report no later than 10/27/2021. The tracking status hearing of 10/22/2021 is reset to 11/05/2021 at 8:30 a.m., but to track the case only (no appearance is required, the case will not be called). Emailed notice (mw, ) |
| Filing 6 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant WalMart, Inc. by Kimberly Musick Haskell (Haskell, Kimberly) |
| Filing 5 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant WalMart, Inc. by James P. Balog (Balog, James) |
| Filing 4 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Initial tracking status hearing set for 10/22/2021 at 8:30 a.m. to track the case only (no appearance is required, the case will not be called). Instead, the Court will set the case schedule after reviewing the written status report. The parties must file a joint initial status report with the content described in the attached status report requirements by 10/13/2021. Plaintiff must still file the report even if Defendant has not responded to requests to craft a joint report. If Defendant has not been served, then Plaintiff must complete the part of the report on the progress of service. Also, counsel must carefully review Judge Chang's Case Management Procedures, available online at ilnd.uscourts.gov (navigate to Judges / District Judges / Judge Edmond E. Chang). Because the Procedures are occasionally revised, counsel must read them anew even if the counsel or the party has appeared before Judge Chang in other cases. Emailed notice (Attachments: #1 Status Report Requirements) (mw, ) |
| Filing 3 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff John Conlisk by Thomas A Kantas (Kantas, Thomas) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL Cover Sheet (Kantas, Thomas) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT filed by John Conlisk; jury demand. Filing fee $ 402, receipt number 0752-18613338.(Kantas, Thomas) |
| CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Edmond E. Chang. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Sunil R. Harjani. Case assignment: Random assignment. (jmk, ) |
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: Conlisk v. WalMart, Inc. | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: John Conlisk | |
| Represented By: | Thomas A Kantas |
| 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: WalMart, Inc. | |
| Represented By: | James P. Balog |
| Represented By: | Kimberly Musick Haskell |
| 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.
