Cade v. Delaware and Hudson Railway Company Inc.
| Tyler Cade |
| Delaware and Hudson Railway Company Inc. doing business as Canadian Pacific Railway Company |
| 6:2020cv01349 |
| October 30, 2020 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of New York |
| Therese Wiley Dancks |
| Gary L Sharpe |
| Federal Employer's Liability |
| 45 U.S.C. ยง 51 Railways: Fed. Employer's Liability Act |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on December 8, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 6 ANSWER to #1 Complaint by Delaware and Hudson Railway Company Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Affidavit Certificate of E-file)(Barbour, Scott) |
| Filing 5 AFFIDAVIT of Service for Complaint served on Delaware and Hudson Railway Company, Inc. on 11/20/2020, filed by Tyler Cade. (Naumes, Christopher) |
| ***Answer due date updated for Delaware and Hudson Railway Company Inc. answer due 12/11/2020. (mgh) |
| Filing 4 Summons Issued as to Delaware and Hudson Railway Company Inc. (mgh) |
| Filing 3 REQUEST FOR ISSUANCE OF SUMMONS(ES): Tyler Cade is requesting summons(es) be issued as to (Naumes, Christopher) |
| Filing 2 G.O. 25 FILING ORDER ISSUED: Initial Conference set for 1/28/2021 09:30 AM before Magistrate Judge Therese Wiley Dancks. Civil Case Management Plan must be filed and Mandatory Disclosures are to be exchanged by the parties on or before 1/21/2021. All conferences are conducted by telephone. Plaintiff's attorney will initiate the call (unless the Court directs differently) and shall contact Judge Dancks' Chambers at 315-234-8618 (a dedicated line solely for telephone conferences) once all parties are on the line. Counsel may use a teleconferencing service for assistance initiating conference calls to the Court. For cases involving pro se parties, the Court will initiate the call for the Rule 16 Conference. Pro se parties are instructed to provide the Court with a telephone number where they may be reached for a conference call. (Pursuant to Local Rule 26.2, mandatory disclosures are to be exchanged among the parties but are NOT to be filed with the Court.) (mgh) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Delaware and Hudson Railway Company Inc. (Filing fee $400 receipt number ANYNDC-5300057) filed by Tyler Cade. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(mgh) |
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 York Northern 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: Cade v. Delaware and Hudson Railway Company Inc. | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant: Delaware and Hudson Railway Company Inc. doing business as Canadian Pacific Railway Company | |
| Represented By: | Scott A. Barbour |
| 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: Tyler Cade | |
| Represented By: | Robert T. Naumes, Sr. |
| Represented By: | Christopher C. Naumes |
| 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.
