Gentry v. York Risk Services Group, Inc. et al
| Harrie Leroy gentry |
| Steadfast Insurance Company, Lyft, Inc., Tina Roman and York Risk Services Group, Inc. |
| 2:2019cv00222 |
| February 6, 2019 |
| US District Court for the District of Nevada |
| Carl W Hoffman |
| Gloria M Navarro |
| Insurance |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 |
| Defendant |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on July 3, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 12 NOTICE; filed by Harrie Leroy Gentry. (Ganier, Ashley) |
| Filing 11 Joint STATUS REPORT by Defendants Lyft, Inc., Tina Roman, Steadfast Insurance Company, York Risk Services Group, Inc.. (Miller, Danielle) |
| Filing 10 REPLY to Response to #6 Motion to Dismiss by Defendants Lyft, Inc., Tina Roman, Steadfast Insurance Company, York Risk Services Group, Inc.. (Miller, Danielle) |
| Filing 9 CERTIFICATE of Interested Parties by Harrie Leroy Gentry. There are no known interested parties other than those participating in the case (Mainor, Bradley) |
| Filing 8 NOTICE of Appearance by attorney Bradley S. Mainor on behalf of Plaintiff Harrie Leroy Gentry. (Mainor, Bradley) |
| Filing 7 RESPONSE to #6 Motion to Dismiss by Plaintiff Harrie Leroy Gentry. Replies due by 2/28/2019.(Mainor, Bradley) |
| Filing 6 MOTION to Dismiss by Defendants Lyft, Inc., Tina Roman, Steadfast Insurance Company, York Risk Services Group, Inc.. Responses due by 2/21/2019. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B) (Miller, Danielle) |
| Filing 5 STATEMENT REGARDING REMOVAL by Defendants Lyft, Inc., Tina Roman, Steadfast Insurance Company, York Risk Services Group, Inc.. (Miller, Danielle) |
| Filing 4 CERTIFICATE of Mailing re: #3 Minute Order Removal Case, by Defendants Lyft, Inc., Tina Roman, Steadfast Insurance Company, York Risk Services Group, Inc.. (Miller, Danielle) |
| Filing 3 MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS of the Honorable Chief Judge Gloria M. Navarro on 2/7/2019. Statement regarding removed action is due by 2/22/2019. Joint Status Report regarding removed action is due by 3/9/2019. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - JM) |
| Filing 2 CERTIFICATE of Interested Parties by Lyft, Inc., Tina Roman, Steadfast Insurance Company, York Risk Services Group, Inc. that identifies all parties that have an interest in the outcome of this case. Other Affiliate Steadfast Insurance Company, Other Affiliate Zurich Holding Company of America, Inc, Other Affiliate Zurich Financial Services, Ltd., Other Affiliate Zurich Insurance Company, Ltd., Other Affiliate Zurich American Insruance Company, Other Affiliate York Risk Services Group, Inc., Other Affiliate Lyft, Inc., Other Affiliate Tina Roman for Lyft, Inc., Steadfast Insurance Company, Tina Roman, York Risk Services Group, Inc. added. (Miller, Danielle) |
| Filing 1 PETITION FOR REMOVAL from District Court, Clark County, Case Number A-18-786499-C, (Filing fee $ 400 receipt number 0978-5422027) by Steadfast Insurance Company, Lyft, Inc., York Risk Services Group, Inc., Tina Roman. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit C, #4 Civil Cover Sheet)(Miller, Danielle) NOTICE of Certificate of Interested Parties requirement: Under Local Rule 7.1-1, a party must immediately file its disclosure statement with its first appearance, pleading, petition, motion, response, or other request addressed to the court. |
| Case randomly assigned to Chief Judge Gloria M. Navarro and Magistrate Judge Carl W. Hoffman. (JM) |
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 Nevada 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.
