Brollini v. Union Pacific Railroad Co.
| Anthony W. Brollini and Trudy A. Nowak |
| Union Pacific Railroad Co. |
| 8:2023cv00200 |
| May 16, 2023 |
| US District Court for the District of Nebraska |
| Joseph F Bataillon |
| Susan M Bazis |
| Civil Rights: Americans with Disabilities - Employment |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 12101 Americans with Disabilities Act |
| Both |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 19, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 15
PROTECTIVE ORDER- Upon consideration of the parties' joint request for entry of a Protective Order, (Filing No. #13 ), the Court enters the following Protective Order governing the disclosure of confidential Discovery Material by a Producing Party to a Receiving Party in this Action. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Susan M. Bazis. (MKR)
|
|
Filing 14
FINAL PROGRESSION ORDER - Depositions due April 19, 2024. Status Conference set for 4/16/2024 at 02:00 PM by Telephone before Magistrate Judge Susan M. Bazis.Ordered by Magistrate Judge Susan M. Bazis. (MKR)
|
| Filing 13 REPORT of Rule 26(f) Planning Meeting by Attorney Laura Baures on behalf of Plaintiff Anthony W. Brollini.(Baures, Laura) |
|
Filing 12
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 11
SCHEDULING ORDER - Rule 26 Meeting Report Deadline set for 7/13/2023. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Susan M. Bazis. (MKR)
|
| Filing 10 Defendant's ANSWER to Complaint by Union Pacific Railroad Co. (Kennison, David) |
| Filing 9 NOTICE of Appearance by Attorney Addison C. McCauley on behalf of Defendant Union Pacific Railroad Co. (McCauley, Addison) |
| Filing 8 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 7.1 identifying Corporate Parent Union Pacific Corporation for Union Pacific Railroad Co.. by Attorney David P. Kennison on behalf of Defendants Union Pacific Railroad Co., Union Pacific Corporation.(Kennison, David) |
| Filing 7 NOTICE of Appearance by Attorney Scott P. Moore on behalf of Defendant Union Pacific Railroad Co. (Moore, Scott) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE of Appearance of David P. Kennison by Attorney David P. Kennison on behalf of Defendant Union Pacific Railroad Co. (Kennison, David) |
| Filing 5 SUMMONS Returned Executed upon defendant Union Pacific Railroad Co. on 5/18/2023. (Kaster, James) |
| Filing 4 Summons Issued as to defendant Union Pacific Railroad Co. regarding Complaint #1 . YOU MUST PRINT YOUR ISSUED SUMMONS, WHICH ARE ATTACHED TO THIS DOCUMENT. PAPER COPIES WILL NOT BE MAILED. (NMW) |
| Filing 3 TEXT NOTICE OF JUDGES ASSIGNED: Senior Judge Joseph F. Bataillon 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. (NMW) |
| Filing 2 Summons Requested as to Union Pacific Railroad Co. regarding Complaint #1 . (Baures, Laura) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT with jury demand against Union Pacific Railroad Co. ( Filing fee $ 402, receipt number ANEDC-4864729), by Attorney Laura Baures on behalf of Anthony Brollini (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - UP Medical Rules)(Baures, Laura) |
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
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.
