Rankin v. Geico Indemnity Company
| William R. Rankin |
| Geico Indemnity Company |
| 4:2022cv01220 |
| November 16, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri |
| Matthew T Schelp |
| Insurance |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Insurance Contract |
| Both |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on December 29, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 14
CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER: This case is assigned to Track: two [SEE ORDER FOR COMPLETE DETAILS]. (Motion to Join Parties due by 4/14/2023. Discovery Completion due by 2/1/2024. Non-Dispositive Motions due by 2/12/2024. ADR Future Reference 10/16/2023. Dispositive Motions due by 2/15/2024. Jury Trial set for 7/8/2024 09:00 AM in Courtroom 14S - St. Louis before District Judge Matthew T. Schelp.) Signed by District Judge Matthew T. Schelp on 12/29/2022. (KCD)
|
| Filing 13 ELECTRONIC MINUTE ENTRY (no pdf attached) for proceedings held before District Judge Matthew T. Schelp: Rule 16 Conference held on 12/29/2022. Conference held via Zoom. CMO to issue. (proceedings started: 10:32 am) (proceedings ended: 10:34 am) (Appearance for Plaintiff: Michael Knepper (appearing for Christopher Geldmacher))(Appearance for Defendant: Lucas Ude) (TMT) |
| Filing 12 JOINT SCHEDULING PLAN by Plaintiff William R. Rankin. . (Geldmacher, Christopher) |
|
Filing 11
RULE 16 ORDER: This case is assigned to Track: two [SEE ORDER FOR COMPLETE DETAILS]. ( Joint Scheduling Plan due by 12/27/2022. Rule 16 Conference set for 12/29/2022 10:30 AM in Zoom Video Conference before District Judge Matthew T. Schelp. ) Signed by District Judge Matthew T. Schelp on 12/08/2022. (KCD)
|
| Filing 10 AMENDED NOTICE OF REMOVAL by Defendant Geico Indemnity Company. . (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit Exhibit C, #4 Exhibit Exhibit D, #5 Exhibit Exhibit E, #6 Exhibit Exhibit F, #7 Exhibit Exhibit G, #8 Exhibit Exhibit H)(Ude, Lucas) Modified on 11/28/2022 (KCD). |
| Filing 9 DOCUMENTS DELETED. FILED IN ERROR. SEE #10 AMENDED DOCUMENT by Defendant Geico Indemnity Company. . (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 5 Exhibit E)(Ude, Lucas) Modified on 11/28/2022 (KCD). |
| Filing 8 ANSWER to Complaint by Geico Indemnity Company. (Attachments: #1 Attachment Jury Demand)(Ude, Lucas) |
| Filing 7 DISCLOSURE OF ORGANIZATIONAL INTERESTS CERTIFICATE by Defendant Geico Indemnity Company, GEICO Corporation, Berkshire Hathaway Inc. (Bub, David) Modified on 11/23/2022 (CBL). |
|
Filing 6
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER : IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant shall file an Amended Notice of Removal that properly establishes this Court's subject matter jurisdiction no later than Wednesday, November 23, 2022. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that future filings, including all exhibits, shall comply with the requirements within Local Rule 2.17. ( Amended/Supplemental Pleadings due by 11/23/2022.) Signed by District Judge Matthew T. Schelp on 11/17/2022. (KCD)
|
| Filing 5 NOTICE OF FILING NOTICE OF REMOVAL filed by Defendant Geico Indemnity Company Sent To: Plaintiff (JDC) |
| Filing 4 Petition (Removal/Transfer) Received From: Circuit Court of St. Louis City, filed by William R. Rankin.(JDC) |
| Filing 3 ENTRY of Appearance by Russell F. Watters for Defendant Geico Indemnity Company. (Watters, Russell) |
| Filing 2 ENTRY of Appearance by Lucas James Ude for Defendant Geico Indemnity Company. (Ude, Lucas) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from St. Francois County, case number 2222-CC09719, with receipt number AMOEDC-9625054, in the amount of $402 Jury Demand,, filed by Geico Indemnity Company. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - Plaintiff'sPetition, #2 Exhibit B - State Court File, #3 Exhibit C - Incident Report, #4 Exhibit D - Notice of Removal to Plaintiff, #5 Exhibit E - Notice of Removal to State Court, #6 Exhibit F - Certified Policy, #7 Exhibit G - State Court Docket, #8 Civil Cover Sheet, #9 Original Filing Form)(Ude, Lucas) (Attachment 8 replaced on 11/16/2022) (JDC). Modified on 11/17/2022 (TMT). (ECF 1-3 contains unredacted personal identifiers and has been sealed) |
| Case Opening Notification. Judge Assigned: Honorable Matthew T. Schelp. All non-governmental organizational parties (corporations, limited liability companies, limited liability partnerships) must file Disclosure of Organizational Interests Certificate within 10 days of the filing of the first pleading or entry of appearance # (moed-0001.pdf). (JDC) |
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
| Search for this case: Rankin v. Geico Indemnity Company | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: William R. Rankin | |
| Represented By: | Christopher K. Geldmacher |
| 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: Geico Indemnity Company | |
| Represented By: | Lucas James Ude |
| Represented By: | Russell F. Watters |
| 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.
