Murphy v. Faurecia Automotive Seating, Inc.

Plaintiff: Cortelious Murphy
Defendant: Faurecia Automotive Seating, Inc.
Case Number: 3:2019cv00024
Filed: April 9, 2019
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky
Presiding Judge: Gregory F VanTatenhove
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Jobs
Cause of Action: 28:1441
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on May 7, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
May 7, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 9 ORDER: 1. Motion to Remand #4 is GRANTED; 2. This action is REMANDED in its entirety to the Shelby Circuit Court from which it was removed; 3. This matter is STRICKEN from the Court's active docket; 4. Any and all pending motions are DENIED AS MOOT. Signed by Judge Gregory F. VanTatenhove on 5/7/2109. (CBD)cc: COR, Clerk Shelby Circuit Court
May 2, 2019 ***MOTION SUBMITTED TO CHAMBERS of Judge Van Tatenhove for review: re #4 MOTION to Remand by Cortelious Murphy (CBD)
May 1, 2019 Filing 8 RESPONSE to Motion re #4 MOTION to Remand by Cortelious Murphy filed by Faurecia Automotive Seating, Inc.. (Gray, Elisabeth)
April 24, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 7 ORDER: Murphy's Motion to Stay #6 is GRANTED, and resolution of the pending Motion to Dismiss #5 is STAYED. In the event the Court denies Plaintiff Cortelious Murphy's Motion to Remand #4 , Murphy shall have 21 days from the date of that order by which to respond to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss. Signed by Judge Gregory F. VanTatenhove on 4/24/2019.(CBD)cc: COR
April 22, 2019 Filing 6 MOTION to Stay re #5 MOTION to Dismiss for failure to state a claim or, in the Alternative, MOTION for Summary Judgment by Cortelious Murphy (Attachments: #1 Exhibit E-mail regarding remand, #2 Proposed Order)(Scharfenberger, Kurt) Modified on 4/23/2019 (SCD).
April 16, 2019 Filing 5 MOTION to Dismiss for failure to state a claim or, in the Alternative, MOTION for Summary Judgment by Faurecia Automotive Seating, Inc. (Attachments: #1 Memorandum in Support, #2 Exhibit A - Affidavit of Butch Newhouse, #3 Exhibit B - Affidavit of Jennifer Gaddis, #4 Proposed Order)(Gray, Elisabeth) Modified on 4/23/2019 (SCD).
April 12, 2019 Filing 4 MOTION to Remand by Cortelious Murphy (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Stipulation, #2 Proposed Order)(Scharfenberger, Kurt)
April 10, 2019 Filing 3 FRCP 7.1 DISCLOSURE STATEMENT by Faurecia Automotive Seating, Inc. identifying Corporate Parent Faurecia S.A. for Faurecia Automotive Seating, Inc... (Gray, Elisabeth)
April 10, 2019 Conflict Check run. (CBD)
April 9, 2019 Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Shelby Circuit Court, case number 19-CI-98 (Filing fee $400; receipt number 0643-4330191), filed by Faurecia Automotive Seating, Inc. (Attachments: #1 State Court Record, #2 Civil Cover Sheet)(CBD)

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 Kentucky Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Murphy v. Faurecia Automotive Seating, Inc.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Faurecia Automotive Seating, Inc.
Represented By: John F. Birmingham, Jr.
Represented By: Felicia S. O'Connor
Represented By: Elisabeth S. Gray
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Cortelious Murphy
Represented By: Kurt A. Scharfenberger
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 [ 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?