SMITH v. MARLU INDIANA LLC
| MOSES SMITH |
| MARLU STOCKTON LLC, MARLU INDIANA LLC, MARLU INVESTMENT GROUP and LITTLE CAESARS PIZZA |
| 1:2019cv01467 |
| April 11, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana |
| Matthew P Brookman |
| James R Sweeney |
| P.I.: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. § 1446 |
| Both |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on July 9, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 19
ORDER: CASE MANAGEMENT PLAN APPROVED AS SUBMITTED. Initial Pretrial Conference held on 7/5/2019. Discovery due by 2/11/2020. Dispositive Motions due by 4/11/2020. Settlement Conference set for 2/26/2020 at 09:00 AM (Eastern Time) in room #316, United States Courthouse, 46 E. Ohio Street, Indianapolis, Indiana before Magistrate Judge Matthew P. Brookman. Status Conference set for 11/15/2019 at 11:00 AM (Eastern Time) in Telephonic before Magistrate Judge Matthew P. Brookman. Signed by Magistrate Judge Matthew P. Brookman on 7/9/2019.(TMB)
|
|
Filing 18
ORDER - This matter comes before the Court on the Parties' Joint Motion to Substitute. The Court, being duly advised, hereby GRANTS said Motion. The Clerk of the Court is instructed to substitute Marlu Indiana LLC as the proper party name in place of the incorrectly identified Marlu Stockton LLC d/b/a Church's Chicken a/k/a Little Caesars Pizza a/k/a Marlu Investment Group a/k/a Marlu Indiana LLC. All claims against Marlu Stockton LLC d/b/a Church's Chicken a/k/a Little Caesars Pizza a/k/a Marlu Investment Group a/k/a Marlu Indiana LLC in this matter are ismissed with prejudice. Signed by Judge James R. Sweeney II on 6/23/2019. (JDC)
|
| Filing 16 Submission of Proposed Order , re #15 Joint MOTION to Substitute Party , filed by Plaintiff MOSES SMITH. (Fleschner, George) |
| Filing 15 Joint MOTION to Substitute Party , filed by Plaintiff MOSES SMITH. (Fleschner, George) |
| Filing 14 Agreed CASE MANAGEMENT PLAN TENDERED, filed by Defendant MARLU STOCKTON LLC . (Danielson, Melissa) |
| Filing 17 MARGINAL ENTRY - The Court accepts the parties' Joint Jurisdictional Statement ECF No. #12 as sufficient to establish this Court's diversity jurisdiction at this time. Statements in future filings that contradict the parties' representations herein will prompt the Court to require further action by the parties. Accordingly, such statements should not be made without thorough investigation. Signed by Judge James R. Sweeney II on 6/18/2019. (JDC) |
| Filing 12 Jurisdictional Statement Joint Jurisdictional Statement by MOSES SMITH. (Fleschner, George) |
|
Filing 11
Order Directing Further Proceedings - On April 11, 2019, Defendant filed a Notice of Removal, removing this action from state court on the asserted basis of the Court's diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 1332. Furthermore, Local Rule 81-1 provides that within 30 days of the filing of a notice of removal, a plaintiff who "has not filed a motion to remand must file a statement responding to the notice of removal's allegations as to the citizenship of the parties and the amount in controversy." S.D. Ind. L.R. 81-1 (b). More than 30 days have passed since the filing of the Notice of Removal, but Plaintiff has not filed a motion to remand or a Rule 81-1 statement. Therefore, the parties are ORDERED to file by May 30, 2019, a joint jurisdictional statement as to why the Court has jurisdiction over this matter, or if they cannot agree, the parties should each file competing jurisdictional statements. ***SEE ORDER FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION*** Signed by Judge James R. Sweeney II on 5/15/2019.(JDC)
|
|
Filing 10
ORDER SETTING INITIAL PRE-TRIAL CONFERENCE - Initial Telephonic Pretrial Conference set for 7/5/2019 at 12:00 PM (Eastern Time) before Magistrate Judge Matthew P. Brookman. The information needed to participate in this telephonic conference will be provided by a separate notification. No fewer than seven (7) days before the IPTC, counsel must file a Proposed CMP. SEE ORDER. Signed by Judge Richard L. Young on 5/2/2019.(JRB)
|
| Filing 9 PROCEDURES AND PRACTICES before Judge James R. Sweeney II. (JDC) |
| Filing 8 ANSWER to Complaint (Notice of Removal) with Jury Demand , filed by MARLU STOCKTON LLC.(Danielson, Melissa) |
| Filing 7 Submission of State Court Record from Johnson County in case number 41D01-1903-CT-000044.. (Attachments: #1 Envelope)(HET) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE of Appearance by George Steven Fleschner on behalf of Plaintiff MOSES SMITH. (Fleschner, George) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE of Appearance by Kathryn Ellen Fleschner McMullen on behalf of Plaintiff MOSES SMITH. (Fleschner McMullen, Kathryn) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE of Appearance by Caleb Samuel Fleschner on behalf of Plaintiff MOSES SMITH. (Fleschner, Caleb) |
| Filing 3 MAGISTRATE JUDGE's NOTICE of Availability to Exercise Jurisdiction issued. (HET) |
| Filing 2 Corporate Disclosure Statement by MARLU STOCKTON LLC. (Danielson, Melissa) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Johnson Superior Court, case number 41D01-1903-CT-000044, filed by MARLU STOCKTON LLC. (Filing fee $400, receipt number 0756-5378147) (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - Defendant's Notice to Plaintiffs and Clerk of Johnson County Superior Court, #2 State Court Record B - State Court Record (Appearance Complaint, Summons, Certificate of Issuance, Defendant's Appearance, Motion for Extension, Order Granting Extension, Certificate of Service and Affidavit, #3 Exhibit Complaint, #4 Civil Cover Sheet)(Danielson, Melissa) |
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 Indiana 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.
