Key Construction, Inc. v. Western Surety Company
Plaintiff: Key Construction, Inc.
Defendant: Western Surety Company
Case Number: 6:2022cv01247
Filed: October 27, 2022
Court: US District Court for the District of Kansas
Presiding Judge: Daniel D Crabtree
Referring Judge: Angel D Mitchell
Nature of Suit: Contract: Other
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 Petition for Removal- Contract Dispute
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on February 23, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
December 21, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 13 REPLY TO RESPONSE TO MOTION by Defendant Western Surety Company re: #10 Motion to Change Venue (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit Exhibit B)(Locascio, Alec)
December 7, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 12 RESPONSE by Plaintiff Key Construction, Inc. re #10 Motion to Change Venue (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1, #2 Exhibit 2, #3 Exhibit 3)(Chlumsky, Katherine)
December 7, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 11 MOTION to Remand by Plaintiff Key Construction, Inc. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1, #2 Exhibit 2, #3 Exhibit 3)(Chlumsky, Katherine)
November 30, 2022 Opinion or Order MOTION REFERRAL to Magistrate Judge REMOVED as to: #10 MOTION to Change Venue . The motion will be resolved by the District Judge.(ht)
November 23, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 10 MOTION to Change Venue by Defendant Western Surety Company. (Locascio, Alec)
November 23, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 9 ANSWER to Complaint by Western Surety Company. (Locascio, Alec)
November 16, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 8 ORDER: The court ordered defendant to show cause why the court should not recommend that the district judge dismiss this case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction--namely, because defendant's notice of removal did not adequately plead complete diversity of citizenship between the parties. (ECF 3, 6.) Defendant has now responded to the order to show cause. (ECF 7.) After reviewing the response, the court is satisfied that defendant has sufficiently alleged facts that the parties are completely diverse for subject matter jurisdiction purposes under 28 U.S.C. 1332. Signed by Magistrate Judge Angel D. Mitchell on 11/16/2022. (ht)
November 16, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 7 RESPONSE re #6 Order to Show Cause by Defendant Western Surety Company. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B) (Locascio, Alec)
November 9, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 6 SECOND NOTICE AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE. Defendant is ordered to show cause in writing by 11/28/2022, why the court should not recommend that the district judge remand this case for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. Any response to this show-cause order must point to factual allegations that, if true, would establish complete diversity of citizenship. Signed by Magistrate Judge Angel D. Mitchell on 11/9/2022. (mam)
November 8, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 5 ENTRY OF APPEARANCE by Katherine E.M. Chlumsky on behalf of Key Construction, Inc. (Chlumsky, Katherine)
November 7, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 4 RESPONSE re #3 Order to Show Cause by Defendant Western Surety Company. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A)(Locascio, Alec)
October 28, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 3 NOTICE AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE. Because the notice of removal does not allege facts sufficient to establish complete diversity of citizenship, the court orders defendant to show cause in writing by 11/10/2022, why the court should not recommend that the district judge remand this case for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. Any response to this show-cause order must point to factual allegations that, if true, would establish complete diversity of citizenship. Signed by Magistrate Judge Angel D. Mitchell on 10/28/2022. (mam)
October 28, 2022 Opinion or Order NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY - Designation of place of trial is missing. The filing party/attorney is directed to correct the deficiency immediately.(This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no.pdf document associated with this entry.) (kmc)
October 28, 2022 Opinion or Order NOTICE OF JUDGE ASSIGNMENT: Case assigned to District Judge Daniel D. Crabtree and Magistrate Judge Angel D. Mitchell for all proceedings. (This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no.pdf document associated with this entry.) (kmc)
October 27, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET by Defendant Western Surety Company. (Locascio, Alec)
October 27, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Sedgwick County District Court, case number 2022-CV-001714-CO, trial location of Kansas City (Filing fee $402, Internet Payment Receipt Number AKSDC-5901491.), filed by Western Surety Company. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B)(Locascio, Alec)

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 Kansas District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Key Construction, Inc. v. Western Surety Company
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Key Construction, Inc.
Represented By: Jeffrey D. Leonard
Represented By: Katherine E.M. Chlumsky
Represented By: Neil C. Gosch
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: Western Surety Company
Represented By: Alec Locascio
Represented By: Stephen Owen Griffin
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?