Stecich v. Menard, Inc.
| Diane Stecich |
| Menard, Inc. |
| 1:2024cv01400 |
| February 20, 2024 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| Nancy L Maldonado |
| Personal Property: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury |
| Defendant |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on April 16, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 18 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Young B. Kim: Parties are reminded that they are not to file discovery materials on the docket "unless they are filed in support of or in opposition to a motion." (See LR 26.3.) Mailed notice (ec) |
| Filing 17 Rule 26 (a) Disclosures by Menard, Inc. (Andrews, W.) |
| Filing 16 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Young B. Kim: Parties are reminded that they are not required to file certificates of service in federal court unless LR 5.5(a) applies. LR 5.5(a) states, "[a] certificate of service is required only when service of a document filed on the Court's E-Filing system is made on a recipient who is not an E-Filer listed on the docket of the proceeding." Mailed notice (ec) |
| Filing 15 NOTICE by Diane Stecich Proof of Service of Plaintiff's Rule 26 Initial Disclosures (Kaczmarek, Michael) |
| Filing 14 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Young B. Kim: Parties are ordered to adhere to the following supplemental written discovery schedule: (1) serve answers to discovery requests (including production of responsive documents) by June 14, 2024; (2) confer about the adequacy of the discovery responses by June 28, 2024; and (3) file a joint status report identifying each side's written discovery issues (must identify the specific interrogatories and requests to produce), along with the relevant discovery responses as exhibits, by July 9, 2024. The court will review the status report and resolve written discovery issues identified in the status report. The court will not consider general objections to discovery requests when ruling on discovery issues. If the parties do not have any disputed written discovery issues, a status report is not required. Pursuant to Rule of Evidence 502(d), this court orders that inadvertent disclosures of attorney-client privileged and attorney work materials will not constitute a waiver of the associated privilege. The court further orders that upon written notification (including emails) from the opposing side that an inadvertent disclosure has occurred, the party shall return and/or destroy the materials at issue or file a motion for a determination on the claimed privilege within seven calendar days of the written notification. Mailed notice (ec) |
| Filing 13 Pursuant to Local Rule 72.1, this case is hereby referred to the calendar of Honorable Young B. Kim for the purpose of holding proceedings related to: discovery supervision and for settlement conference.(ca, ) |
| Filing 12 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Nancy L. Maldonado: The Court has reviewed the parties' joint initial status report #11 . Given the parties' agreement on a discovery schedule, the Court will enter the proposed schedule and refer the case to the assigned magistrate judge for discovery supervision and a settlement conference, if and when requested. The Court strikes the 4/16/2024 initial status conference and sets the following fact discovery schedule: Rule 26(a)(1) disclosures due 4/15/2024; written discovery to issue by 5/14/2024; fact discovery closes 10/3/2024. The Court will defer setting a dispositive motion schedule until the conclusion of fact discovery. The case is referred to Magistrate Judge Kim for discovery supervision and settlement conference, if and when requested. Judge Kim has the authority to modify the discovery schedule. The Court notes that the parties indicate in the report that they anticipate "medical and expert discovery," but request that such discovery be scheduled after a ruling on dispositive motions, presumably on liability. While it is generally not this Court's practice to bifurcate liability and damages discovery in such a manner before and after dispositive motion practice, the Court will defer to the parties and Judge Kim as to the sequencing of discovery. The Court cautions the parties, however, that it will not permit multiple successive motions for summary judgment, and therefore if the parties intend to defer certain discovery until after dispositive motions, they must be certain that all discovery that is necessary for summary judgment practice is complete prior to the filing of any motion. (ca, ) |
| Filing 11 Joint Initial Status Report by Diane Stecich (Kaczmarek, Michael) |
| Filing 10 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Nancy L. Maldonado: In light of the filing of Defendant's answer, the Court will reset the status hearing to an earlier date. The 5/14/2024 status hearing #9 is stricken. Instead, a Rule 16 initial status hearing is set for 4/16/24 at 10:00 a.m. in-person in Courtroom 1925. By 4/9/24, the parties shall file a joint Initial Status Report that complies with the Court's standing order, which can be found on the Court's website. Emailed notice (yt) |
| Filing 9 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Nancy L. Maldonado: A Rule 16 initial status hearing is set for 5/14/24 at 10:00 a.m. in person in Courtroom 1925. By 5/7/24 the parties shall file a joint Initial Status Report that complies with the Court's standing order, which can be found on the Court's website. Notices mailed. (psm, ) |
| Filing 8 ANSWER to Complaint with Jury Demand by Menard, Inc.(Andrews, W.) |
| Filing 7 MAILED Notice of Removal letter to counsel of record. (aee, ) |
| Filing 6 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Diane Stecich by Michael A. Kaczmarek (Kaczmarek, Michael) |
| CLERK'S NOTICE: Pursuant to Local Rule 73.1(b), a United States Magistrate Judge of this court is available to conduct all proceedings in this civil action. If all parties consent to have the currently assigned United States Magistrate Judge conduct all proceedings in this case, including trial, the entry of final judgment, and all post-trial proceedings, all parties must sign their names on the attached #Consent To# form. This consent form is eligible for filing only if executed by all parties. The parties can also express their consent to jurisdiction by a magistrate judge in any joint filing, including the Joint Initial Status Report or proposed Case Management Order. (aee, ) |
| Filing 5 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Menard, Inc. by Meganne Trela (Trela, Meganne) |
| Filing 4 NOTIFICATION of Affiliates pursuant to Local Rule 3.2 by Menard, Inc. (Andrews, W.) |
| Filing 3 CIVIL Cover Sheet (Andrews, W.) |
| Filing 2 ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Menard, Inc. by W. Anthony Andrews (Andrews, W.) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE of Removal from Cook County, case number (2024L000265) filed by Menard, Inc. Filing fee $ 405, receipt number AILNDC-21653014. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1, #2 Exhibit 2)(Andrews, W.) |
| CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Nancy L. Maldonado. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Young B. Kim. Case assignment: Random assignment. (Civil Category 2). (axa, ) |
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: Stecich v. Menard, Inc. | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Diane Stecich | |
| Represented By: | Michael A. Kaczmarek |
| Represented By: | Corey A. Benjamin |
| 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: Menard, Inc. | |
| Represented By: | W. Anthony Andrews |
| Represented By: | Meganne Trela |
| 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.
