Schmid, et al. v. Bui, et al.
Ronald W. Schmid and Terri A. Schmid |
SJ Transportation Co., Inc. and Anthony Bui |
5:2019cv01663 |
July 22, 2019 |
US District Court for the Northern District of Ohio |
Benita Y Pearson |
Motor Vehicle |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
Both |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on February 3, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 12 Initial Disclosures filed by All Plaintiffs. (King, Robert) |
Filing 11 Report of Parties' Planning Meeting Discovery Plan - parties do not consent to this case being assigned to the magistrate judge, filed by All Plaintiffs. (King, Robert) |
Filing 10 Initial Disclosures filed by Anthony Bui, SJ Transportation Co., Inc.. (Jamison, Andrew) |
Filing 9 Order In accordance with Rule 26(f) and LR 16.3(b)(3), the parties have submitted a discovery plan (ECF No. #8 ). That plan, however, does not adhere to the template provided by the Court in its Case Management Conference Scheduling Order (ECF No. #7 -3) and, as a result, it lacks certain necessary information. No later than 5 days before the Case Management Conference, the parties are directed to resubmit their discovery plan in accordance with the template provided by the Court at ECF No. #7 -3. Judge Benita Y. Pearson on 8/14/2019. (JLG) |
Filing 8 Report of Parties' Planning Meeting of All Parties - filed by All Plaintiffs. (King, Robert) |
Filing 7 Case Management Conference Scheduling Order with Case Management Conference to be held telephonically on 9/25/2019 at 10:00 a.m. before Judge Benita Y. Pearson. Counsel for Plaintiff shall set up the conference call and contact Chambers directly at 330-884-7435, with all participants on the line. The Court requires personal participation of parties at the Case Management Conference, even when the conference is telephonic. Judge Benita Y. Pearson on 8/2/2019. (Attachments: #1 Attachment No. 1, #2 Attachment No. 2, #3 Attachment No. 3, #4 Attachment No. 4, #5 Attachment No. 5) (S,Ke) |
Filing 6 Proposed Stipulation to Waive Service of a Summons filed by All Plaintiffs. (King, Robert) |
Filing 5 Answer to #1 Complaint, with Jury Demand filed by Anthony Bui, SJ Transportation Co., Inc. (Jamison, Andrew) |
Filing 4 Order granting Motion for Appearance Pro Hac Vice by Attorney Robert J. King, Jr. for Plaintiffs Ronald W. Schmid and Terri A. Schmid. Local Rule 5.1(c) requires that attorneys register for CM/ECF and file and receive all documents electronically. The CM/ECF registration form can be found at www.ohnd.uscourts.gov under Forms. If you were previously granted pro hac vice status and are already registered to file electronically, it is not necessary to register again. (Related Document(s) #2 ). Judge Benita Y. Pearson on 7/25/2019. (JLG) |
Filing 3 Magistrate Consent Form issued. Summons not provided, therefore were not issued. (Y,A) |
Filing 2 Motion for attorney Robert J. King, Jr. to Appear Pro Hac Vice. Filing fee paid, $ 120, receipt number 14660115434. Filed by Ronald W. Schmid, Terri A. Schmid. (Attachments: #1 Affidavit of Robert J. King, Jr.)(Y,A) |
Filing 1 Complaint with jury demand against Anthony Bui and SJ Transportation Co., Inc. Filing fee paid, $400. Receipt # 14660115967. Filed by Ronald W. Schmid, Terri A. Schmid. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Civil Cover Sheet Supplement) (Y,A) |
Random Assignment of Magistrate Judge pursuant to Local Rule 3.1. In the event of a referral, case will be assigned to Magistrate Judge Kathleen B. Burke. (Y,A) |
Judge Benita Y. Pearson assigned to case, (Y,A) |
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 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.