Dycus v. Kroger Limited Partnership I
| Shirley J. Dycus |
| Kroger Limited Partnership I doing business as Ruler Foods |
| 5:2023cv00007 |
| January 11, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Western District of Kentucky |
| Benjamin Beaton |
| P.I.: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1446 Petition for Removal- Personal Injury |
| Both |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on February 15, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 11 RESPONSE to Motion re #8 MOTION to Remand filed by Kroger Limited Partnership I. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Complaint, #2 Exhibit Plaintiff's Discovery Responses, #3 Proposed Order) (Call, Angela) |
| Filing 10 Rule 7.1(a)(2) Disclosure Statement by Shirley J. Dycus (Swanson, Teris) Modified docket text on 2/8/2023 (DeW). |
| Filing 9 NOTICE of Deficiency re #8 Motion to Remand re Plaintiff Shirley Dycus, Attorney Teris N. Swanson. Reason for Deficiency: 7.1 (a)(2) Disclosure Statement. Failure to comply will be brought to the attention of the Court. Response due by 2/14/2023. (DeW) |
| Filing 8 MOTION to Remand by Plaintiff Shirley J. Dycus (Attachments: #1 Exhibit, #2 Exhibit, #3 Exhibit, #4 Exhibit) (Swanson, Teris) |
| Filing 7 Rule 7.1(a)(2) Disclosure Statement by Kroger Limited Partnership I. (DeW) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE OF FILING by Kroger Limited Partnership I re #4 Notice of Deficiency (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Rule 7.1 Disclosure) (Call, Steven) |
| Filing 5 CLERK'S NOTICE to Caldwell Circuit Court and Counsel/Parties re: DN #1 Notice of Removal. (CDL) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE of Deficiency re #1 Notice of Removal. Reason for Deficiency: Missing Rule 7.1(a)(2) Disclosure Statement. Failure to comply will be brought to the attention of the Court. Response due by 1/18/2023. (CDL) |
| Filing 3 Case Assignment (Random Selection): Case Assigned to Judge Benjamin Beaton. (CDL) |
| Filing 2 Rule 7.1 Disclosure Statement identifying Other Affiliate KRGP, Inc. for Kroger Limited Partnership I. (CDL) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL by Kroger Limited Partnership I from Caldwell Circuit Court, case number 22-CI-00125, (Filing fee $402; Receipt No. AKYWDC-3728357), filed by Kroger Limited Partnership I. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Complaint, #2 Exhibit Plaintiff's Discovery Responses, #3 Exhibit State Pleadings, #4 Exhibit Answer, #5 Cover Sheet) (CDL) |
| ANSWER to Complaint with Jury Demand (Filed in Caldwell Circuit Court - See DN #1 -4), by Kroger Limited Partnership I. (CDL) |
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 Western 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
| Search for this case: Dycus v. Kroger Limited Partnership I | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Shirley J. Dycus | |
| Represented By: | Teris N. Swanson |
| 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: Kroger Limited Partnership I doing business as Ruler Foods | |
| Represented By: | Angela M. Call |
| Represented By: | Steven C. Call |
| 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.
