Jenkins v. Bankers Insurance Company
| Karen Jenkins |
| Bankers Insurance Company |
| Hurricane Ida Program Administrator |
| 2:2023cv04460 |
| August 26, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana |
| Barry W Ashe |
| Karen Wells Roby |
| Insurance |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Insurance Contract |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 6, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 7 Amended Exhibit A to Hurricane Ida Case Management Order. (lag) |
| Filing 6 HURRICANE IDA CLAIMS Third Amendment to CMO No. 1. Signed by Chief Judge Nannette Jolivette Brown on 09/14/2023.(lag) |
| Filing 5 HURRICANE IDA CLAIMS Second Amendment to CMO No. 1. Signed by Chief Judge Nannette Jolivette Brown on 09/12/2023.(lag) |
Filing 4
HURRICANE IDA CLAIMS AMENDED CASE MANAGEMENTORDER NO. 1 with Addendum. Signed by Chief Judge Nannette JolivetteBrown on 10/25/2022.(am)
|
| Filing 3 Summons Issued as to Bankers Insurance Company. (am) |
| Filing 2 Initial Case Assignment to Judge Barry W Ashe and Magistrate Judge Karen Wells Roby. (ess) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT with jury demand against Bankers Insurance Company (Filing fee $ 402 receipt number ALAEDC-10112095) filed by Karen Jenkins. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Summons)Attorney Mark Richard Ladd added to party Karen Jenkins (pty:pla).(Ladd, Mark) |
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.
