Schukar v. Catlin Indemnity Company et al
| Laura Schukar |
| Wright Specialty Insurance Agency, LLC, Catlin, Inc. and Catlin Indemnity Company |
| 3:2019cv00373 |
| April 3, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Illinois |
| Reona J Daly |
| Nancy J Rosenstengel |
| Insurance |
| 28 U.S.C. § 1332 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on April 15, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 15 CLERK'S JUDGMENT. Approved by Chief Judge Nancy J. Rosenstengel on 4/15/2019. (mlp) |
Filing 14
ORDER: The parties have filed a joint Stipulation to Dismiss (Doc. #11 ). Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), a Stipulation of Dismissal filed by all the parties who have appeared in the action is effective immediately upon filing and does not require judicial approval. See Jenkins v. Village of Maywood, 506 F.3d 622, 624 (7th Cir. 2007). The Clerk of the Court therefore is DIRECTED to close this case on the Courts docket. Signed by Chief Judge Nancy J. Rosenstengel on 4/15/2019. (mlp) THIS TEXT ENTRY IS AN ORDER OF THE COURT. NO FURTHER DOCUMENTATION WILL BE MAILED.
|
| Filing 13 CJRA TRACK B assigned: Final Pretrial Conference set for 3/18/2020 at 1:30 PM in East St. Louis Courthouse before Chief Judge Nancy J. Rosenstengel. Presumptive Bench Trial month set for April, 2020. (Attachments: #1 Consent to Magistrate Judge)(drb) |
| Filing 12 NOTICE by Catlin Indemnity Company, Catlin, Inc. re #11 Stipulation of Dismissal (Walker, Jennifer) |
| Filing 11 STIPULATION of Dismissal by Catlin Indemnity Company, Catlin, Inc.. (Walker, Jennifer) |
| Filing 10 NOTICE of Appearance by Samantha S. Unsell on behalf of Laura Schukar (Unsell, Samantha) |
| Filing 9 NOTICE OF MODIFICATION re #7 Motion to Dismiss filed by Laura Schukar.Proposed order was attached to the main document. Proposed documents are not to be filed, but rather submitted via e-mail to the Court (see CM/ECF Users Manual at pgs. 2.6-2.7). Proposed order to be deleted in accordance with this Courts practices. Proposed documents need to be e-mailed to the proper judge. (kdb)THIS TEXT ENTRY IS AN ORDER OF THE COURT. NO FURTHER DOCUMENTATION WILL BE MAILED. |
| Filing 8 NOTICE OF ACTION re #7 Motion to Dismiss filed by Laura Schukar. See Local Rule 83.1(f). In all cases filed in, removed to, or transferred to this court, all attorneys, including government attorneys, shall file a written entry of appearance before addressing the court. Attorney Unsell does not have a Notice of Appearance on file in this case. (kdb)THIS TEXT ENTRY IS AN ORDER OF THE COURT. NO FURTHER DOCUMENTATION WILL BE MAILED. |
| Filing 7 MOTION to Dismiss by Laura Schukar. Responses due by 5/13/2019 (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Unsell, Samantha) |
| Filing 6 SUPPLEMENT to Notice of Removal re #1 Notice of Removal, by Catlin Indemnity Company, Catlin, Inc.. Statement of No Jury Demand. (Walker, Jennifer) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE of Appearance by Jennifer Erin Walker on behalf of Catlin Indemnity Company, Catlin, Inc. (Walker, Jennifer) |
| Filing 4 Letter to Attorney Frank DeBoni regarding registration to our District, and attaching courtesy copies of Docs. 2-4. (kls3) |
|
Filing 3
ORDER REGARDING SUPPLEMENT TO NOTICE OF REMOVAL AND ENTRY OF APPEARANCE: Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1446, this case was removed from state court to this U.S. District Court. Section 1446(a) delineates the procedure for removing a case from state court to federal court and requires, inter alia, that the removing defendant furnish a copy of all process, pleadings, and orders served upon such defendant. Because a jury may be demanded in a state court pleading that is not served upon the defendant(s) (e.g., an answer or a separately-filed jury demand), and this Courts civil cover sheet instructs attorneys to check the Jury Demand box only if a jury was requested in the complaint, the Court hereby DIRECTS the removing defendant(s) to file as a Supplement to Notice of Removal a copy of any state court answer or other pleading/paper which contains a jury demand OR a one-line statement that no jury was demanded by any party prior to removal. If a jury demand appears in the federal case record, no Supplement to Notice of Removal need be filed. In addition, attorneys are reminded that they must file a formal entry of appearance in this case. The removing defendant(s) shall comply with this directive within 14 days from the date of this Order. Supplement to Notice of Removal due by 4/18/2019. Signed by Chief Judge Nancy J. Rosenstengel on 4/4/2019. (kls3)THIS TEXT ENTRY IS AN ORDER OF THE COURT. NO FURTHER DOCUMENTATION WILL BE MAILED.
|
| Filing 2 Notice of Judge Assignment. Chief Judge Nancy J. Rosenstengel and Magistrate Judge Reona J. Daly assigned. All future documents must bear case number 3:19-cv-373-NJR-RJD. If the parties consent to Magistrate Judge assignment, the consent form with instruction is attached for your convenience. Refer to Civil/Removal Case Processing Requirements, found on the ILSD website, for further service information. (Attachments: #1 Brochure)(kls3) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Twentieth Judicial Circuit, St. Clair County, Illinois, case number 19-L-0103 ( Filing fee $ 400 receipt number 0754-3845967), filed by Catlin, Inc., Catlin Indemnity Company. (Attachments: #1 State Court Complaint, #2 Civil Cover Sheet)(Walker, Jennifer) |
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 Southern 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.
