Heinemann v. Michigan Department of Corrections
Plaintiff: Kathleen Heinemann
Defendant: Michigan Department of Corrections
Case Number: 1:2021cv00893
Filed: October 20, 2021
Court: US District Court for the Western District of Michigan
Presiding Judge: Sally J Berens
Referring Judge: Robert J Jonker
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Other
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441
Jury Demanded By: Both
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on December 14, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
December 14, 2021 Filing 14 SELECTION of Bruce W. Neckers as facilitative mediator by defendant Michigan Department of Corrections (Beach, Bryan)
December 1, 2021 Certified copy of Order on Motion to Dismiss #12 sent via U.S. Mail to Branch County Circuit Court (pjw)
November 30, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 13 CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER: discovery to be completed by 7/15/2022; dispositive motions due by 8/31/2022; settlement conference set for 12/5/2022 at 01:00 PM at 650 Federal Building, Grand Rapids, MI before Magistrate Judge Sally J. Berens; final pretrial conference set for 1/11/2023 at 03:00 PM at 699 Federal Building, Grand Rapids, MI before Chief Judge Robert J. Jonker; jury trial set for 1/31/2023 at 08:30 AM at 699 Federal Building, Grand Rapids, MI before Chief Judge Robert J. Jonker; signed by Chief Judge Robert J. Jonker (Chief Judge Robert J. Jonker, sdb)
November 30, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 12 ORDER remanding State law claims in First Amended Complaint (Counts I, II, III) to Branch County Circuit Court and denying Defendant's motion to dismiss Plaintiff's remaining Rehabilitation Act claim (ECF No. 4); signed by Chief Judge Robert J. Jonker (Chief Judge Robert J. Jonker, sdb)
November 22, 2021 Filing 11 CERTIFICATE of compliance re word count for Reply to Response to Motion #10 filed by Michigan Department of Corrections (Beach, Bryan)
November 22, 2021 Filing 10 REPLY to response to Motion for Partial Dismissal filed by Michigan Department of Corrections (Beach, Bryan)
November 18, 2021 Filing 9 JOINT STATUS REPORT (Laurila, Andrew)
November 12, 2021 Filing 8 RESPONSE TO MOTION to dismiss (partial dismissal) (as taken from #4 ) filed by Kathleen Heinemann (Attachments: #1 Index of Exhibits, #2 Exhibit 1, #3 Exhibit 2, #4 Exhibit 3, #5 Exhibit 4, #6 Exhibit 5) (Laurila, Andrew)
October 25, 2021 Filing 7 NOTICE to attorney Bryan Beach regarding recent filing #4 (pjw)
October 22, 2021 ANSWER to complaint #1 with affirmative defenses and jury demand (as taken from #6 ) by Michigan Department of Corrections (pjw)
October 22, 2021 MOTION to dismiss (partial dismissal) (as taken from #4 ) by defendant Michigan Department of Corrections; (pjw)
October 22, 2021 Filing 6 ANSWER to First Amended Complaint, Affirmative Defenses and Reliance on Jury Demand with certificate of service by defendant Michigan Department of Corrections (Beach, Bryan) Modified text on 10/25/2021 (pjw).
October 22, 2021 Filing 5 BRIEF in support of MOTION for Partial Dismissal of Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1) and (6) with certificate of service by defendant Michigan Department of Corrections re #4 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A: Opinion and Order, Fisher v MDOC, Case No. 1:20-cv-302) (Beach, Bryan) Modified text on 10/25/2021 (pjw).
October 22, 2021 Filing 4 MOTION for Partial Dismissal of Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1) and (6) with certificate of service by defendant Michigan Department of Corrections (Beach, Bryan) Modified text on 10/25/2021 (pjw).
October 21, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 3 ORDER setting Rule 16 scheduling conference: Rule 16 scheduling conference is set for 11/30/2021 at 03:00 PM at 699 Federal Building, Grand Rapids, MI before Chief Judge Robert J. Jonker; status report due by 11/23/2021 ; signed by Chief Judge Robert J. Jonker (Chief Judge Robert J. Jonker, ymc)
October 21, 2021 Filing 2 NOTICE that this case has been assigned Robert J. Jonker (pjw)
October 21, 2021 (NON-DOCUMENT) ATTORNEY APPEARANCE of Andrew J. Laurila on behalf of plaintiff Kathleen Heinemann (Laurila, Andrew)
October 21, 2021 (NON-DOCUMENT) ATTORNEY APPEARANCE of James Bretton Rasor on behalf of plaintiff Kathleen Heinemann (Rasor, James)
October 20, 2021 Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Branch County Circuit Court case number 21-02-040-CD filed by Michigan Department of Corrections (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1: Summons and Plaintiff's Amended Complaint and Jury Demand) (Beach, Bryan)
October 20, 2021 FILING FEE PAID re #1 by defendant Michigan Department of Corrections in the amount of $402, receipt number AMIWDC-6573413 (Beach, Bryan)

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 Michigan Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Heinemann v. Michigan Department of Corrections
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Kathleen Heinemann
Represented By: Andrew J. Laurila
Represented By: James Bretton Rasor
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: Michigan Department of Corrections
Represented By: Bryan William Beach
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?