BOUCHIE v. INTACT INSURANCE SPECIALTY SOLUTIONS et al
| Jennifer Bouchie |
| Inact Insurance Specialty Solutions, INTACT INSURANCE SPECIALTY SOLUTIONS and JAMES RIVER INSURANCE COMPANY |
| 2:2022cv00297 |
| July 21, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana |
| Mario Garcia |
| James R Sweeney |
| Insurance |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 Petition for Removal- Insurance Contract |
| Defendant |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 16, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 15 JOINT PROPOSED CASE MANAGEMENT PLAN TENDERED, filed by Defendant INTACT INSURANCE SPECIALTY SOLUTIONS . (Steck, Janis) |
| Filing 13 RESPONSE in Opposition re #8 MOTION to Remand , filed by Defendant INTACT INSURANCE SPECIALTY SOLUTIONS. (Steck, Janis) |
Filing 12
ORDER granting #11 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response to #8 Plaintiff's Verified Motion to Remand. The August 23, 2022 deadline for Defendant to respond to Plaintiff's Verified Motion to Remand is continued three weeks (21 days) up to and including Tuesday, September 13, 2022. Signed by Judge James R. Sweeney II on 8/22/2022. (TPS)
|
| Filing 11 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response to September 13, 2022 re #8 MOTION to Remand , filed by Defendant INTACT INSURANCE SPECIALTY SOLUTIONS. (Attachments: #1 Text of Proposed Order)(Steck, Janis) |
| Filing 10 BRIEF/MEMORANDUM in Support re #8 MOTION to Remand , filed by Plaintiff JENNIFER BOUCHIE. (Johnson, Keith) |
| Filing 9 Appendix of Exhibits in Support of Motion re #8 MOTION to Remand , filed by Plaintiff JENNIFER BOUCHIE. (Johnson, Keith) |
| Filing 8 MOTION to Remand , filed by Plaintiff JENNIFER BOUCHIE. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Exhibit 1, #2 Exhibit Exhibit 2, #3 Exhibit Exhibit 3, #4 Exhibit Exhibit 4, #5 Exhibit Exhibit 5, #6 Exhibit Exhibit 6, #7 Text of Proposed Order Proposed Order)(Johnson, Keith) |
|
Filing 7
ORDER SETTING INITIAL PRE-TRIAL CONFERENCE - The above case is hereby assigned for an INITIAL PRETRIAL CONFERENCE on WEDNESDAY, 9/21/2022 at 10:00 AM (Eastern Time) before Magistrate Judge Mario Garcia. The information needed to participate in this telephonic conference will be provided by a separate notification. (SEE ORDER) Signed by Magistrate Judge Mario Garcia on 7/29/2022.(KAA)
|
| Filing 6 Defendant Atlantic Specialty Insurance Company, Improperly Sued as Intact Insurance Specialty Solutions ANSWER to Complaint Affirmative Defenses and Demand for Jury Trial, filed by INTACT INSURANCE SPECIALTY SOLUTIONS.(Steck, Janis) |
| Filing 5 PRACTICES AND PROCEDURES before Judge James R. Sweeney II. (TPS) |
| Filing 4 MAGISTRATE JUDGE's NOTICE of Availability to Exercise Jurisdiction issued. (TPS) |
| Filing 3 Corporate Disclosure Statement by Inact Insurance Specialty Solutions identifying Corporate Parent Intact Insurance Group USA Holdings, Inc. for Inact Insurance Specialty Solutions.. (Steck, Janis) |
| Filing 2 NOTICE of Appearance by Janis E. Steck on behalf of Defendant Inact Insurance Specialty Solutions. (Steck, Janis) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Vigo County Superior Court 2, case number 84D02-1903-CT-002123, filed by Inact Insurance Specialty Solutions. (Filing fee $402, receipt number AINSDC-7200978) (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Exhibit A - State Court Pleadings and Docket, #3 Exhibit B - Operative Complaint, #4 Exhibit C - Notice of Filing Notice of Removal)(Steck, Janis) |
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.
