Shelton v. Union Pacific Railroad Company
Plaintiff: Scot A. Shelton
Defendant: Union Pacific Railroad Company
Case Number: 8:2019cv00016
Filed: January 14, 2019
Court: US District Court for the District of Nebraska
Presiding Judge: Joseph F Bataillon
Referring Judge: Cheryl R Zwart
Nature of Suit: Federal Employer's Liability
Cause of Action: 45 U.S.C. ยง 51
Jury Demanded By: Both
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on April 3, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
March 14, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 8 INITIAL PROGRESSION ORDER: 1) A status conference to discuss case progression and potential settlement will be held with the undersigned magistrate judge on May 21, 2019 at 10:00 a.m. Counsel shall use the conferencing instructions assigned to this case to participate in the conference.2) Written discovery and depositions may begin at any time.3) Plaintiffs' mandatory disclosures shall be served by April 1, 2019.4) Defendant's mandatory disclosures shall be served by May 1, 2019. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Cheryl R. Zwart. (CEW)
March 13, 2019 Filing 7 SUMMONS Returned Executed upon defendant Union Pacific Railroad Company on 2/27/2019. (Sassaman, Shawn)
March 12, 2019 Filing 6 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 7.1 identifying Corporate Parent Union Pacific Corporation for Union Pacific Railroad Company. by Attorney David J. Schmitt on behalf of Defendants Union Pacific Railroad Company, Union Pacific Corporation.(Schmitt, David)
March 12, 2019 Filing 5 ANSWER to Complaint with with jury demand by Union Pacific Railroad Company (Schmitt, David)
February 19, 2019 Filing 4 Summons Issued as to defendant Union Pacific Railroad Company. YOU MUST PRINT YOUR ISSUED SUMMONS, WHICH ARE ATTACHED TO THIS DOCUMENT. PAPER COPIES WILL NOT BE MAILED. (LKO)
February 18, 2019 Filing 3 Summons Requested as to regarding Complaint #1 . (Sassaman, Shawn)
January 15, 2019 Filing 2 TEXT NOTICE OF JUDGES ASSIGNED: Senior Judge Joseph F. Bataillon and Magistrate Judge Cheryl R. Zwart assigned. In accordance with 28 U.S.C. 636(c)(2), the parties are notified that, if all parties consent, a magistrate judge may conduct a civil action or proceeding, including a jury or nonjury trial, subject to the courts rules and policies governing the assignment of judges in civil cases. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 73; NEGenR 1.4. (LKO)
January 14, 2019 Filing 1 COMPLAINT with jury demand against Union Pacific Railroad Company ( Filing fee $ 400, receipt number ANEDC-3842458), by Attorney Shawn M. Sassaman on behalf of Scot A. Shelton (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Sassaman, Shawn)

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

Search for this case: Shelton v. Union Pacific Railroad Company
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Union Pacific Railroad Company
Represented By: David J. Schmitt
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 ]
Plaintiff: Scot A. Shelton
Represented By: Shawn M. Sassaman
Represented By: Luke Pepper
Represented By: Tobi A. Russeck
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?