CRAIG et al v. CORNERSTONE TRADING GROUP, LLC et al
| TUSHAWN CRAIG and MARQUETTA STOKES |
| CORNERSTONE TRADING GROUP, LLC and SETH SMITH |
| CITY OF RICHMOND, INDIANA |
| 1:2023cv01575 |
| September 1, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana |
| Mark J Dinsmore |
| Tanya Walton Pratt |
| P.I.: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal |
| Defendant |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on January 5, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 20 ANSWER and Affirmative Defenses to City of Richmond's Cross-claims, filed by Defendant CORNERSTONE TRADING GROUP, LLC, Cross Defendant CORNERSTONE TRADING GROUP, LLC. (Cooley, Michael) |
| Filing 19 ANSWER and Affirmative Defenses to City of Richmond's Cross-claims, filed by Defendant SETH SMITH, Cross Defendant SETH SMITH. (Cooley, Michael) |
| Filing 18 City of Richmond, Indiana's ANSWER to Complaint Affirmative Defenses and Jury Demand, CROSSCLAIM against CORNERSTONE TRADING GROUP, LLC, SETH SMITH, filed by CITY OF RICHMOND, INDIANA.(Thomas, Seth) |
| Filing 17 REPLY in Support of Motion re #13 MOTION to Remand , filed by Plaintiffs TUSHAWN CRAIG, MARQUETTA STOKES. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Plaintiff's Exhibit 1, #2 Exhibit Plaintiff's Exhibit 2)(Crossen, Trevor) |
| Filing 16 RESPONSE in Opposition re #13 MOTION to Remand , filed by Defendant CITY OF RICHMOND, INDIANA, Third Party Defendant CITY OF RICHMOND, INDIANA. (Thomas, Seth) |
Filing 15
ORDER: On September 1, 2023, Defendants filed Notice of Pending State Court Motion (Filing No. 3). If counsel intends for this court to address any pending motion, that Motion must be filed in CM/ECF in this case along with the subsequent briefing, if any. See order. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 9/25/2023. (LF)
|
| Filing 14 Submission of Proposed Order , re #13 MOTION to Remand , filed by Plaintiffs TUSHAWN CRAIG, MARQUETTA STOKES. (Vuotto, Gina) |
| Filing 13 MOTION to Remand , filed by Plaintiffs TUSHAWN CRAIG, MARQUETTA STOKES. (Vuotto, Gina) |
| Filing 12 Submission for Proposed Order Denying Defendant's Notice of Removal, filed by Plaintiffs TUSHAWN CRAIG, MARQUETTA STOKES. (Crossen, Trevor) |
| Filing 11 RESPONSE in Opposition to Defendant's Notice of Removal, filed by Plaintiffs TUSHAWN CRAIG, MARQUETTA STOKES. (Crossen, Trevor) |
| Filing 10 RESPONSE Answer and Affirmative Defenses and Jury Demand in Response to Cornerstone's Third Party Complaint, filed by Defendant CITY OF RICHMOND, INDIANA, Third Party Defendant CITY OF RICHMOND, INDIANA. (Thomas, Seth) |
| Filing 9 Notice to File Rule 7.1 Disclosure Statement. (RAGS) (LF) |
| Filing 8 MAGISTRATE JUDGE's NOTICE of Availability to Exercise Jurisdiction issued. (LF) |
| Filing 7 NOTICE of Appearance by Andrew M. McNeil on behalf of Defendant/Third Party Defendant CITY OF RICHMOND, INDIANA. (McNeil, Andrew) Modified on 9/1/2023 (TRG). |
| Filing 6 NOTICE of Appearance by Jackson Lee Schroeder on behalf of Defendant/Third Party Defendant CITY OF RICHMOND, INDIANA. (Schroeder, Jackson) Modified on 9/1/2023 (TRG). |
| Filing 5 NOTICE of Appearance by Brad R. Sugarman on behalf of Defendant/Third Party Defendant CITY OF RICHMOND, INDIANA. (Sugarman, Brad) Modified on 9/1/2023 (TRG). |
| Filing 4 Rule 7.1 Disclosure Statement by CITY OF RICHMOND, INDIANA. (Thomas, Seth) |
| Filing 3 NOTICE of Pending Motions, filed by Third Party Defendant CITY OF RICHMOND, INDIANA (Thomas, Seth) |
| Filing 2 NOTICE of Appearance by Seth M. Thomas on behalf of Defendant/Third Party Defendant CITY OF RICHMOND, INDIANA. (Thomas, Seth) Modified on 9/1/2023 (TRG). |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Wayne Superior, case number 89D01-2304-CT-31, filed by CITY OF RICHMOND, INDIANA. (Filing fee $402, receipt number AINSDC-7793132) (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 State Court Record (Complaint, App of T. Crossen, Summons to S. Smith, App of B. Felton, App of D. Wellman, Defs Mot for Change of Judge, Defs MEOT, Order Granting MEOT and Change of Judge, Agreement of Counsel as to Special Judge, Order Approving Special Judge, Order-Acceptance of Appt as Special Judge, Order Requiring filing of proposed CMP, Proposed CMO, Order approving CMO with Additions, Order Setting Pretrial and Trial dates, App of N. Allen, Answer of S. Smith, Cornerstone Answer and Third Party Complaint, Summons to City (D. Snow)-Third Party Complaint, Summons to City (A. Sickmann)-Third Party Complaint, Certificate of Issuance of Summons, Court Scheduling Order, Pls Mot for Leave to File Amended Class Action Complaint, Order Granting Motion for Leave, App of G. Koeneman, Summons to City (D. Snow) Amended Complaint, App of A McNeil, B Sugarman, J Schroeder, Citys MEOT to Defs Third Party Complaint, Order Granting Citys MEOT-Third Party Complaint, Service returned served to City (D. Snow)-Third Party Complaint, S Smith Answer to Amended Complaint, Cornerstone Answer to Amended Complaint, S Smith Motion for Summary Judgment, S Smith Memorandum in Support of Summary Judgment, S Smith Designation of Evidence, Order Establishing Scheduling and Setting SJ Hearing, Order Setting SJ Hearing, Pls Resp in Opp to Def Cornerstone MTD, Pls Resp in Opp to Def S Smith MTD, Certified Mail Return from City of Richmond Third Party Complaint, Citys MEOT to Pls Amended Class Action Complaint, Order Granting Citys MEOT to Amended Class Action Complaint), #3 Exhibit 3-Amended Class Action Complaint, #4 Exhibit 4-Tort Claims Notice, #5 Exhibit 5-Tort Claims Notice, #6 Exhibit 6-Tort Claims Notice)(Thomas, Seth) |
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.
