Fisher v. Conner
| Marilyn Fisher |
| Janie Conner |
| 1:2021cv01110 |
| November 17, 2021 |
| US District Court for the District of New Mexico |
| Laura Fashing |
| Kirtan Khalsa |
| Kea W Riggs |
| Personal Injury: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 |
| Defendant |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on January 4, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 13 Letter sent to Clerk of First Judicial District Court along with certified Order Remanding case to there court and a copy of the entire case file. (meq) |
Filing 12
ORDER REMANDING CASE by District Judge Kea W. Riggs. Plaintiff's #3 Motion to Remand GRANTED. This action is REMANDED to the First Judicial District Court, Santa Fe County, State of New Mexico. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to take the necessary actions to remand the case. (ve)
|
| Filing 11 REPLY to Response to Motion re #3 MOTION to Remand filed by Marilyn Fisher. (O'Friel, Daniel) |
|
Filing 10
INITIAL SCHEDULING ORDER by Magistrate Judge Kirtan Khalsa. Counsel are to meet and confer by 1/10/2022. The parties' Joint Status Report and Provisional Discovery Plan is due by 1/21/2022. A Telephonic Rule 16 Initial Scheduling Conference is set for 1/31/2022 at 10:30 AM before Judge Khalsa. Counsel are to call Judge Khalsa's AT&T conference line at (877) 848-7030 and enter the code 7324132 to connect to the proceedings.(rps)
|
| Filing 9 NOTICE REGARDING DOCUMENT ENTRIES: Because this case has been reassigned to a district judge, please be advised that any documents filed by the parties under Rule 73(b) have been permanently removed from the docket. Document(s) removed: No. 6. [THIS IS A TEXT-ONLY ENTRY. THERE ARE NO DOCUMENTS ATTACHED.] (bl) |
| Filing 8 RESPONSE in Opposition re #3 MOTION to Remand filed by Janie Conner. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit) (Jones, Jeffrey) |
| Filing 7 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that this case has been reassigned to District Judge Kea W. Riggs as the trial judge. Under D.N.M.LR-Civ. 10.1, the first page of each document must have the case file number and initials of the assigned judges.Accordingly, further documents filed in this matter must bear the case number and the judges' initials shown in the case caption and the NEF for this document. Kindly reflect this change in your filings. Magistrate Judge Laura Fashing no longer assigned to this case.[THIS IS A TEXT-ONLY ENTRY. THERE ARE NO DOCUMENTS ATTACHED.] (dr) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE by Janie Conner 81.1(a) filing state pld's (Attachments: #1 Exhibit) (Jones, Jeffrey) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE OF CONSENT SUBMISSION DEADLINE: Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 73(b)(2), the parties are reminded that a magistrate judge was assigned as the trial judge in this matter under 28 U.S.C. 636(c). The parties are advised that the Clerk will reassign this matter to a district judge as the trial judge no later than 10 days from the entry of this notice unless consents from all parties have been filed. The parties are free to withhold consent. If you have already entered your consent, you need not resubmit. (cda)[THIS IS A TEXT-ONLY ENTRY. THERE ARE NO DOCUMENTS ATTACHED.] |
| Filing 3 MOTION to Remand by Marilyn Fisher. (O'Friel, Daniel) |
| Filing 2 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that this case has been randomly assigned to United States Magistrate Judge Laura Fashing to conduct dispositive proceedings in this matter, including motions and trial. Appeal from a judgment entered by a Magistrate Judge will be to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit. It is the responsibility of the case filer to serve a copy of this Notice upon all parties with the summons and complaint. Consent is strictly voluntary, and a party is free to withhold consent without adverse consequences. Should a party choose to consent, notice should be made no later than 21 days after entry of the Order setting the Rule 16 Initial Scheduling Conference. For e-filers, visit our Web site at www.nmd.uscourts.gov for more information and instructions.[THIS IS A TEXT-ONLY ENTRY. THERE ARE NO DOCUMENTS ATTACHED.] (dr) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL by Janie Conner from 1st Judicial District Court, case number D-101-CV-2021-1779. ( Filing Fee - Online Payment), filed by Janie Conner. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Jones, Jeffrey) |
| Filing and Administrative Fees Received: $ 402 receipt number ANMDC-7996231 re #1 Notice of Removal filed by Janie Conner (Payment made via Pay.gov)(Jones, Jeffrey) |
| United States Magistrate Judge Laura Fashing and United States Magistrate Judge Kirtan Khalsa assigned. (dr) |
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 New Mexico 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: Fisher v. Conner | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Marilyn Fisher | |
| Represented By: | Daniel J O'Friel |
| 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 ] |
| Defendant: Janie Conner | |
| Represented By: | Jeffrey E. Jones |
| 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.
