KRATZER v. SCOTT HOTEL GROUP, LLC

KRATZER v. SCOTT HOTEL GROUP, LLC

Plaintiff:	PAUL KRATZER
Defendant:	SCOTT HOTEL GROUP, LLC
Case Number:	4:2017cv00212
Filed:	November 9, 2017
Court:	US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana
Office:	New Albany Office
Presiding Judge:	Debra McVicker Lynch
Presiding Judge:	Tanya Walton Pratt
Nature of Suit:	Contract: Other
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Other Contract
Jury Demanded By:	Plaintiff

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
April 29, 2019	Filing 103 ENTRY OVERRULING DEFENDANT'S OBJECTIONS TO THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S DECISION - Defendant Scott Hotel Group LLC's Objection to the Magistrate Judge's decision (Filing No. 50 ) is DENIED. See Entry for additional details. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 4/29/2019. (MAT)
April 24, 2018	Filing 29 ENTRY ON PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE - Because the Plaintiff has made an initial showing of subject matter jurisdiction under CAFA, the Court determines that this action may proceed at this stage of the litigation. The Plaintiff& #039;s obligation to show cause why this action should not be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction is DISCHARGED. Because the Order awarding the Defendant its attorney fees was based on a preliminary finding that subject matter jurisdiction did not exist, the Court VACATES the Order granting the Defendant's Motion for Attorney Fees (Filing No. 24 ). See Order for details. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 4/24/2018.(LBT)

Date Filed

Document Text

April 29, 2019

Filing 103 ENTRY OVERRULING DEFENDANT'S OBJECTIONS TO THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S DECISION - Defendant Scott Hotel Group LLC's Objection to the Magistrate Judge's decision (Filing No. 50 ) is DENIED. See Entry for additional details. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 4/29/2019. (MAT)

April 24, 2018

Filing 29 ENTRY ON PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE - Because the Plaintiff has made an initial showing of subject matter jurisdiction under CAFA, the Court determines that this action may proceed at this stage of the litigation. The Plaintiff& #039;s obligation to show cause why this action should not be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction is DISCHARGED. Because the Order awarding the Defendant its attorney fees was based on a preliminary finding that subject matter jurisdiction did not exist, the Court VACATES the Order granting the Defendant's Motion for Attorney Fees (Filing No. 24 ). See Order for details. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 4/24/2018.(LBT)

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 this case: KRATZER v. SCOTT HOTEL GROUP, LLC
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: PAUL KRATZER
Represented By:	Jasper Ward
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Defendant: SCOTT HOTEL GROUP, LLC
Represented By:	Robert L. Burkart
Represented By:	Patrick A. Shoulders
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]

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.

Why Is My Information Online?