Ray v. City of Cleveland
Plaintiff: Alfred Ray
Defendant: City of Cleveland
Case Number: 1:2019cv02440
Filed: October 18, 2019
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of Ohio
Presiding Judge: Christopher A Boyko
Nature of Suit: Labor: Family and Medical Leave Act
Cause of Action: 29:2661
Jury Demanded By: Both
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on December 13, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
December 13, 2019 Filing 7 Answer to #1 Complaint with Jury Demand filed by City of Cleveland. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Local 507 Non Seasonal Collective Bargaining Agreement)(Boutton, Amanda)
December 11, 2019 Filing 6 Notice of Case Management Conference with telephonic conference to be held on 2/6/20 at 10:30 a.m. before Judge Christopher A. Boyko. This Court requires the participation of lead counsel. Counsel for plaintiff is to set up the call by calling Chambers with all counsel on the line at 216-357-7151 or providing call-in information to all counsel and the Court. Parties shall be available by phone, if needed. Judge Christopher A. Boyko on 12/11/2019. (Attachments: #1 Report of Parties Planning Meeting, #2 Magistrate Consent Package)(S,HR)
November 5, 2019 Opinion or Order Order [non-document] granting #5 Defendant's Motion for extension of time until December 13, 2019 to answer. City of Cleveland answer due 12/13/2019. Judge Christopher A. Boyko on 11/5/2019.(D, I)
November 4, 2019 Filing 5 Motion for extension of time until December 13, 2019 to answer filed by Defendant City of Cleveland. (Boutton, Amanda)
November 4, 2019 Filing 4 Attorney Appearance by Mark V. Webber and Amanda M.M. Boutton filed by on behalf of All Defendants. (Boutton, Amanda)
October 30, 2019 Filing 3 Return of Service by Clerk by certified mail executed upon City of Cleveland c/o Barbara Langhenry, Director of Law (9459) on 10/25/2019, filed on behalf of Alfred Ray Related document(s) #2 . (J,FE)
October 21, 2019 Service by Clerk. Summons and Complaint addressed to City of Cleveland placed in U.S. Mail. Type of service: certified mail. Receipt # 70182290000129719459. (B,R)
October 18, 2019 Filing 2 Original Summons and Magistrate Consent Form issued to counsel for service upon City of Cleveland. (Attachments: #1 Magistrate Consent Form) (B,R)
October 18, 2019 Random Assignment of Magistrate Judge pursuant to Local Rule 3.1. In the event of a referral, case will be assigned to Magistrate Judge Jonathan D. Greenberg. (B,R)
October 18, 2019 Judge Christopher A. Boyko assigned to case, (B,R)
October 18, 2019 Filing 1 Complaint with jury demand against City of Cleveland. Filing fee paid $ 400, Receipt number 0647-9582441.. Filed by Alfred Ray. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Summons upon City of Cleveland) (Neel, David)

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 Ohio Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Ray v. City of Cleveland
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: City of Cleveland
Represented By: Mark V. Webber
Represented By: Amanda M.M. Boutton
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: Alfred Ray
Represented By: David W. Neel
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.


Why Is My Information Online?