Smith v. Starbucks Corporation
Plaintiff: Janet Smith
Defendant: Starbucks Corporation
Case Number: 0:2019cv02301
Filed: August 20, 2019
Court: US District Court for the District of Minnesota
Presiding Judge: Hildy Bowbeer
Referring Judge: Ann D Montgomery
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Jobs
Cause of Action: 28:1332
Jury Demanded By: Both
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on October 17, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
October 17, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 9 PROTECTIVE ORDER. Signed by Magistrate Judge Hildy Bowbeer on 10/17/2019. (JMK)
October 17, 2019 Filing 8 PROPOSED ORDER TO JUDGE re #7 Stipulation. (Girouard, Mark)
October 17, 2019 Filing 7 STIPULATION for Protective Order by Starbucks Corporation. Jointly Signed by Janet Smith. (Girouard, Mark)
October 11, 2019 Filing 6 REPORT of Rule 26(f) Planning Meeting. Filed by Janet Smith. Jointly Signed by Starbucks Corporation.(Parker, Andrew)
September 20, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 5 ORDER setting PRETRIAL SCHEDULING CONFERENCE: Rule 26 Meeting Report due by 10/24/2019. Pretrial Conference set for 10/31/2019 at 01:00 PM in Courtroom 6B (STP) before Magistrate Judge Hildy Bowbeer. Signed by Magistrate Judge Hildy Bowbeer on 9/20/2019. (Attachments: #1 Consent Form)(JMK)
September 10, 2019 Filing 4 Plaintiff's REPLY to Counterclaim filed by Janet Smith. (DOCUMENT FILED IN ERROR/NOT NECESSARY. Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet) (Parker, Andrew) Modified text on 9/11/2019 (MMG).
August 28, 2019 (Text-Only) NOTICE - Magistrate Judge Hildy Bowbeer's Practice Pointers, which have been recently revised, are available on the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota's #website. All parties are expected to be familiar with and adhere to these Practice Pointers, including any variances from Local Rules. (JMK)
August 27, 2019 Filing 3 Defendant's ANSWER to Complaint and, COUNTERCLAIM against Janet Smith. filed by Starbucks Corporation. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A) (Girouard, Mark) Modified text on 8/28/2019 (MMG).
August 20, 2019 Filing 2 TEXT ONLY ENTRY: CLERK'S NOTICE OF INITIAL CASE ASSIGNMENT. Case assigned to Judge Ann D. Montgomery per Civil (3rd, 4th - Civil Rights) list, referred to Magistrate Judge Hildy Bowbeer. Please use case number 19-cv-2301 (ADM/HB). (lmb)
August 20, 2019 Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Hennepin County District Court, case number Pending (filing fee $ 400, receipt number AMNDC-7093657) filed by Starbucks Corporation. No summons requested. (Attachments: #1 Summons and Complaint, #2 Notice of Filing of Notice of Removal, #3 Affidavit of Service, #4 Civil Cover Sheet) (Riskin, Sarah)

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 Minnesota District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Smith v. Starbucks Corporation
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Janet Smith
Represented By: Jordon Greenlee
Represented By: Lori A Johnson
Represented By: Andrew D Parker
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: Nicole F. Dailo
Represented By: Mark J Girouard
Represented By: Sarah B C Riskin
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?