FIELDS v. MAC'S CONVENIENCE STORES, LLC
| LISA FIELDS |
| MAC'S CONVENIENT STORES, LLC and MAC'S CONVENIENCE STORES, LLC |
| 1:2023cv00177 |
| January 27, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana |
| Tim A Baker |
| Tanya Walton Pratt |
| Personal Inj. Prod. Liability |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury |
| Defendant |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 13, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 12
ORDER REFERRING CASE to Magistrate Judge - Based on the written consents of the parties, this action is now referred to the assigned United States Magistrate Judge to conduct all proceedings and order the entry of judgment, in accordance with 28 U.S.C. 636(c) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 73. PLEASE USE ALTERED CASE NO. 1:23-cv-00177-TAB-TWP ON ALL FUTURE FILINGS WITH THIS COURT. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 3/13/2023.(AKH)
|
| Filing 11 CASE MANAGEMENT PLAN TENDERED, filed by Defendant MAC'S CONVENIENCE STORES, LLC . (Casper, Michelle) |
|
Filing 10
SCHEDULING ORDER:Telephonic Initial Pretrial Conference set for 4/3/2023 09:30 AM (Eastern Time) before Magistrate Judge Tim A. Baker. Parties shall participate in this conference by counsel. The information needed by counsel of record to participate in this telephonic conference will be provided by separate notification. If a proposed Case Management Plan ("CMP") has not yet been filed, the parties are ordered to confer prior to the initial pretrial conference and prepare a proposed CMP. See Order for additional information. Signed by Magistrate Judge Tim A. Baker on 2/16/2023.(SWM)
|
|
Filing 9
STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER #8 SO ORDERED AND APPROVED. Signed by Magistrate Judge Tim A. Baker on 2/7/2023.(SWM)
|
| Filing 8 Joint MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER, filed by Defendant MAC'S CONVENIENCE STORES, LLC. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1: Proposed Stipulated Protective Order)(Geschke, Brett) Modified on 2/7/2023 (AKH). |
| Filing 7 Defendant Mac Convenience Stores, LLC's ANSWER to Complaint (Notice of Removal) with Jury Demand to Plaintiff's Amended Complaint, filed by MAC'S CONVENIENCE STORES, LLC.(Casper, Michelle) |
| Filing 6 MAGISTRATE JUDGE's NOTICE of Availability to Exercise Jurisdiction issued. (DRB) |
| Filing 5 Notice to File Rule 7.1 Disclosure Statement. (RAGS) (DRB) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE of Appearance by Brett James Geschke on behalf of Defendant MAC'S CONVENIENCE STORES, LLC. (Geschke, Brett) Modified on 1/30/2023 (AKH). |
| Filing 3 NOTICE of Appearance by Michelle L. Casper on behalf of Defendant MAC'S CONVENIENCE STORES, LLC. (Casper, Michelle) Modified on 1/30/2023 (AKH). |
| Filing 2 Rule 7.1 Disclosure Statement by MAC'S CONVENIENCE STORES, LLC. (Casper, Michelle) Modified on 1/30/2023 (AKH). |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Bartholomew Circuit Court, case number 03C01-2212-CT-005899, filed by MAC'S CONVENIENCE STORES, LLC. (Filing fee $402, receipt number AINSDC-7477589) (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Incident Report, #2 Exhibit Affidavit of Scott Scharenberg, #3 Exhibit Couche-Tard Business Records, #4 Exhibit Plaintiff's Complaint, #5 Exhibit First Amended Complaint, #6 Exhibit Plaintiff's Response to Request To Admit, #7 Exhibit State Court's Docket-Complaint, Summons, Appearance, Motions, Amended Complaint, #8 Civil Cover Sheet Civil Cover Sheet)(Casper, Michelle) Modified on 1/30/2023 - edited defendants name (AKH). |
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.
