Maza v. Canadian National Railway
| Canadian National Railway |
| Michelle Maza |
| 2:2022cv03314 |
| September 16, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana |
| Nannette Jolivette Brown |
| Karen Wells Roby |
| P.I.: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Tort/Non-Motor Vehicle |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 7, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 5
ORDER granting #4 Motion for Extension of Time to Answer re #1 Complaint. Signed by Chief Judge Nannette Jolivette Brown on 11/7/2022. (mm)
|
| Filing 4 EXPARTE/CONSENT MOTION for Extension of Time to Answer re #1 Complaint by Canadian National Railway. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order)Attorney Christopher R. Handy added to party Canadian National Railway(pty:dft).(Handy, Christopher) Modified text, linkage on 11/5/2022 (jls). |
| Filing 3 Summons Issued as to Canadian National Railway. (jls) |
| Filing 2 Initial Case Assignment to Chief Judge Nannette Jolivette Brown and Magistrate Judge Karen Wells Roby. (ess) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT with jury demand against Canadian National Railway (Filing fee $ 402 receipt number ALAEDC-9557948) filed by Michelle Maza. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Summons)Attorney Matthew Kenny Handy added to party Michelle Maza(pty:selreq).(Handy, Matthew) (Attachment 2 replaced to flatten on 9/19/2022) (jls). |
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 Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
