Heidger v. Colgate-Palmolive Company et al
| Melanie Heidger |
| Colgate-Palmolive Company and Does 1 through 10 |
| 4:2021cv00035 |
| January 8, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri |
| John A Ross |
| Other Fraud |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
| Both |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on January 27, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 12
ORDER OF CONSOLIDATION: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant Colgate-Palmolive Company's consent motions to consolidate this case with Heidger v. Colgate- Palmolive Company, Case No. 4:21-CV-00035 (JAR) and Muller v. Colgate-Palmolive Company, Case No. 4:21-CV-00036 (JAR) [49, 51] are GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this Order of Consolidation shall be filed in Case No. 4:21-CV-00035-JAR and Case No. 4:21-CV-00036-JAR, as well as the instant case, and that all future documents shall be filed in the instant case. Signed by District Judge John A. Ross on 1/27/2021. (CLO)
|
| Filing 11 NOTICE of Filing of Motion to consolidated by Defendant Colgate-Palmolive Company with case number 4:19-cv-02710 (Attachments: #1 Consent Motion to Consolidate)(Pake, Lisa) |
|
Filing 10
ORDER REQUIRING JOINT PROPOSED SCHEDULING PLAN. (See Full Order.) This case is assigned to Track: 2 - Standard. Joint Scheduling Plan due by 2/19/2021. Signed by District Judge John A. Ross on 1/21/2021. (CBL)
|
| Filing 9 ANSWER to Complaint - Answer to Class Action Petition by Colgate-Palmolive Company.(Pake, Lisa) |
|
Filing 8
Docket Text ORDER: Re: #2 MOTION for Leave to File Sealed Document - Declaration of Ben McLaughlin in Support of Colgate-Palmolive Company's Notice of Removal by Defendant Colgate-Palmolive Company. (Pake, Lisa) ; For good cause shown, ORDERED GRANTED. Signed by District Judge John A. Ross on 1/11/2021. (CLO)
|
| Filing 7 Petition (Removal/Transfer) Received From: Circuit Court, St. Louis County, Missouri, filed by Melanie Heidger.(BAK) |
| Case Opening Notification: Judge Direct-Assigned: U.S. District Judge John A. Ross. (BAK) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE OF FILING NOTICE OF REMOVAL filed by Defendant Colgate-Palmolive Company Sent To: State Court - Executed (Pake, Lisa) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE OF FILING NOTICE OF REMOVAL filed by Defendant Colgate-Palmolive Company Sent To: Plaintiff (Pake, Lisa) |
| Filing 4 DISCLOSURE OF ORGANIZATIONAL INTERESTS CERTIFICATE by Defendant Colgate-Palmolive Company. Parent companies: None., Subsidiaries: Colgate-Palmolive (Gulf States) Ltd.; Colgate-Palmolive (India) Limited; Colgate-Palmolive Arabia Ltd,; Colgate-Palmolive Cameroun S.A.; Hawley & Hazel (BVI) Company Ltd.; P.T. Colgate Palmolive Indonesia, Publicly held company: None,. (Pake, Lisa) |
| Filing 3 SEALED DOCUMENT re #2 MOTION for Leave to File Sealed Document - Declaration of Ben McLaughlin in Support of Colgate-Palmolive Company's Notice of Removal by Defendant Colgate-Palmolive Company. (Pake, Lisa) |
| Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to File Sealed Document - Declaration of Ben McLaughlin in Support of Colgate-Palmolive Company's Notice of Removal by Defendant Colgate-Palmolive Company. (Pake, Lisa) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from St Louis County Circuit Court, case number 20SL-CC05896, with receipt number AMOEDC-8394175, in the amount of $402 Jury Demand,, filed by Colgate-Palmolive Company. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - State Court Filings, #2 Civil Cover Sheet, #3 Original Filing Form)(Pake, Lisa) |
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 Missouri 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.
