Anglim v. Sharp Medical Staffing, LLC
| Carrie Anglim |
| Sharp Medical Staffing, LLC |
| 8:2021cv00171 |
| April 23, 2021 |
| US District Court for the District of Nebraska |
| Susan M Bazis |
| Brian C Buescher |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on December 2, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 14
TEXT ORDER granting #13 Unopposed Motion to Unrestricted Access. Access to Filing No. 8 will no longer be restricted to case participants and the Court. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Susan M. Bazis. (LRH)
|
| Filing 13 MOTION to Set Aside Order on Motion to Restrict pursuant to the E-Goverment Act 10 by Attorney Richard J. Schicker on behalf of Plaintiff Carrie Anglim.(Schicker, Richard) |
|
Filing 12
SCHEDULING ORDER - Rule 26 Meeting Report Deadline set for 7/2/2021. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Susan M. Bazis. (LKO)
|
|
Filing 11
RESTRICTED TELEPHONE CONFERENCE INSTRUCTIONS AND ORDER. ACCESS TO THE PDF DOCUMENT IS RESTRICTED TO CASE PARTICIPANTS AND THE COURT PURSUANT TO FEDERAL RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 5.2(e). Ordered by Magistrate Judge Susan M. Bazis. (RMW)
|
|
Filing 10
TEXT ORDER granting #9 Motion to Restrict. Access to Filing No. 8 shall remain restricted to case participants and the Court. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Susan M. Bazis. (LRH)
|
| Filing 9 MOTION to Restrict pursuant to the E-Government Act (Previously Filed Answer and Exhibit A by Attorney Leigh C. Joyce on behalf of Defendant Sharp Medical Staffing, LLC.(Joyce, Leigh) |
| Filing 8 ANSWER to Notice of Removal Complaint regarding: Notice of Removal Attorney - Complaint, #1 by Sharp Medical Staffing, LLC (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A-Letter dated 10/23/2020, #2 Exhibit B-Discovery Benefits, LLC, #3 Exhibit C-Declaration of Danielle Miller, #4 Exhibit D-Declaration of Rebecca Jones) (Joyce, Leigh) Modified on 5/27/2021 to provisionally restrict per phone call with defense counsel (LRM). Modified on 6/11/2021 to unrestrict per Text Order 14 (LKO). |
| Filing 7 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 7.1 by Attorney Leigh C. Joyce on behalf of Defendant Sharp Medical Staffing, LLC.(Joyce, Leigh) |
|
Filing 6
TEXT ORDER granting #5 Motion for Extension of Time. Defendant shall answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint within fourteen days of the Court's ruling on Plaintiff's anticipated motion to remand. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Susan M. Bazis. (LRH)
|
| Filing 5 UNOPPOSED MOTION for Extension of Time to File a Responsive Pleading by Attorney Leigh C. Joyce on behalf of Defendant Sharp Medical Staffing, LLC.(Joyce, Leigh) |
| Filing 4 ATTORNEY LETTER by Clerk that Attorney Morgan L. Kreiser has not registered for the system. If the requested action is not taken within fifteen (15) days of the date of this letter, this matter will be referred to the assigned magistrate judge for the entry of a show cause order. (LRM) |
| Filing 3 TEXT NOTICE REGARDING CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT by Deputy Clerk as to Defendant Sharp Medical Staffing, LLC. 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.(LRM) |
| Filing 2 TEXT NOTICE OF JUDGES ASSIGNED: Judge Brian C. Buescher and Magistrate Judge Susan M. Bazis 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. (LRM) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL against Carrie Anglim from District Court of Douglas County, Nebraska, Case number CI 21-2708 ( Filing fee $ 402, receipt number ANEDC-4384711) with attached state court pleadings, by Attorney Leigh C. Joyce on behalf of Sharp Medical Staffing, LLC (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A-Sate Court Filings, #2 Exhibit B-Notice of Removal from State Court)(Joyce, Leigh) |
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: Anglim v. Sharp Medical Staffing, LLC | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant: Sharp Medical Staffing, LLC | |
| Represented By: | Morgan L. Kreiser |
| Represented By: | Leigh C. Joyce |
| 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: Carrie Anglim | |
| Represented By: | Richard J. Schicker |
| 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.
