Parmenter v. Union Pacific Railroad Company
Justin G. Parmenter |
Union Pacific Railroad Company |
8:2021cv00077 |
February 26, 2021 |
US District Court for the District of Nebraska |
Michael D Nelson |
Federal Employer's Liability |
45 U.S.C. ยง 51 |
Both |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on January 28, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 11 TEXT NOTICE REGARDING CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT by Deputy Clerk as to Defendant Union Pacific Railroad Company. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 7.1, non-governmental corporate parties are required to file Corporate Disclosure Statements (Statements). The parties shall use the form Corporate Disclosure Statement, available on the Web site of the court at http://www.ned.uscourts.gov/forms/. If you have not filed your Statement, you must do so within 15 days of the date of this notice. If you have already filed your Statement in this case, you are reminded to file a Supplemental Statement within a reasonable time of any change in the information that the statement requires.(CS) |
Filing 10 Certificate of Service by Attorney Reha Dallon on behalf of Defendant Union Pacific Railroad Company.(Dallon, Reha) |
![]() |
![]() |
Filing 7 Defendant's ANSWER to Complaint with with jury demand by Union Pacific Railroad Company (Dallon, Reha) |
Filing 6 SUMMONS Returned Executed upon defendant Union Pacific Railroad Company on 3/22/2021. (Cox, James) |
Filing 5 TEXT ORDER that the duplicate filing fee in the amount of $402.00 is refunded to the payor, James Cox, receipt number ANEDC-4347859. Ordered by Deputy Clerk. (DKM) |
Filing 4 Summons Issued as to defendant Union Pacific Railroad Company regarding Complaint #1 . YOU MUST PRINT YOUR ISSUED SUMMONS, WHICH ARE ATTACHED TO THIS DOCUMENT. PAPER COPIES WILL NOT BE MAILED. (MKR) |
Filing 3 Summons Requested as to Defendant Union Pacific Railroad Company regarding Complaint #1 . (Cox, James) |
Filing 2 TEXT NOTICE OF JUDGES ASSIGNED: Magistrate Judge Michael D. Nelson 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. (MKR) |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT with jury demand against Union Pacific Railroad Company ( Filing fee $ 402, receipt number BNEDC-4347859), by Attorney James L. Cox, Jr. on behalf of Justin G. Parmenter(Cox, James) |
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 Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Search for this case: Parmenter 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: | Reha Dallon |
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: Justin G. Parmenter | |
Represented By: | James L. Cox, Jr. |
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.