Cry v. Starbucks Corporation et al
Plaintiff: David Cry
Defendant: Unidentified Party and Starbucks Corporation
Case Number: 2:2020cv02164
Filed: July 31, 2020
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana
Presiding Judge: Nannette Jolivette Brown
Referring Judge: Michael North
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Americans with Disabilities - Other
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332
Jury Demanded By: Defendant
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on September 21, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
September 21, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 11 ORDER GRANTING #10 Motion to Remand to State Court, as the Court does not have subject matter jurisdiction under federal law. This matter be and is hereby remanded to the Louisiana State District Court for St. Tammany Parish. Signed by Chief Judge Nannette Jolivette Brown on 9/21/2020. (Attachments: #1 Remand letter) (jls)
September 18, 2020 Filing 10 EXPARTE/CONSENT MOTION to Remand to State Court by David Cry. (Attachments: #1 Memorandum in Support, #2 Proposed Order)(Mauldin, Jeanne)
September 2, 2020 Filing 9 STIPULATION by David Cry as to the Amount of Damages. (Mauldin, Jeanne) Modified text on 9/2/2020 (jls).
September 2, 2020 Filing 8 NOTICE of Hearing: Scheduling Conference set for 10/1/2020 at 3:30 PM before case manager by telephone. By Clerk.(jls)
August 14, 2020 Filing 6 Notice of Compliance by Starbucks Corporation re #1 Notice of Removal Pursuant to #3 Directive. (Webre, Rachel) Modified text on 8/17/2020 (jls).
August 12, 2020 Filing 5 Statement of Corporate Disclosure by Starbucks Corporation (Druhan, Morgan)
August 4, 2020 Filing 4 ANSWER to Complaint and Request for Notice by Starbucks Corporation.(Druhan, Morgan) Modified text on 8/4/2020 (jls).
July 31, 2020 Filing 3 Directive of the Clerk regarding compliance with 28:1447(b)re: (1) Notice of Removal filed by Starbucks Corporation. By the Clerk. (bm) (bm).
July 31, 2020 Filing 2 Initial Case Assignment to Chief Judge Nannette Jolivette Brown and Magistrate Judge Michael North. (ess)
July 31, 2020 Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL with jury demand from 22nd Judicial District Court St Tammany Parish, case number 2020-12574 (Filing fee $ 400 receipt number ALAEDC-8427507) filed by Starbucks Corporation. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 State Court Pleadings, #3 Exhibit)Attorney Morgan Ashley Druhan added to party Starbucks Corporation(pty:dft).(Druhan, Morgan)

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

Search for this case: Cry v. Starbucks Corporation et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: David Cry
Represented By: Jeanne M. Mauldin
Represented By: Matthew A. Ziifle
Represented By: Rene' Paul Frederick
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: Unidentified Party
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: Starbucks Corporation
Represented By: Morgan Ashley Druhan
Represented By: Rachel G. Webre
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?