SAXTON v. REDSTONE PRESBYTERIAN SENIORCARE
Plaintiff: COLLEEN M. SAXTON
Defendant: REDSTONE PRESBYTERIAN SENIORCARE
Case Number: 2:2018cv00918
Filed: July 13, 2018
Court: US District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania
Office: Pittsburgh Office
County: Westmoreland
Presiding Judge: Lisa Pupo Lenihan
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Americans with Disabilities - Employment
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 12101
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on September 10, 2018. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
September 10, 2018 Filing 9 CONSENT to Trial/Jurisdiction by US Magistrate Judge OR District Judge Option, by COLLEEN M. SAXTON. (Kerr, Lawrence)
September 10, 2018 Filing 8 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer by REDSTONE PRESBYTERIAN SENIORCARE. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order) (Patak, Terri)
September 6, 2018 Filing 7 Consent to Proceed before US Mag. Judge by REDSTONE PRESBYTERIAN SENIORCARE. (Patak, Terri) Modified on 9/7/2018 to edit docket text as this is not a joint consent. (ksa)
August 15, 2018 Filing 6 NOTICE of Appearance by Marguerite Goglia on behalf of COLLEEN M. SAXTON. (Goglia, Marguerite)
August 9, 2018 Filing 5 WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed by COLLEEN M. SAXTON. REDSTONE PRESBYTERIAN SENIORCARE waiver sent on 7/19/2018, answer due 9/17/2018. (Kerr, Lawrence)
August 7, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 4 ORDER that because this case has been assigned to a Magistrate Judge, each party must execute and file the form consenting to the jurisdiction of the Magistrate Judge or selecting the option to have the case remain assigned to a District Judge David S. Cercone no later than August 28, 2018. The applicable form is available on the Courts website at www.pawd.uscourts.gov in the forms section. THE EVENT USED FOR DOCKETING THIS FORM IS FOUND UNDER OTHER DOCUMENTS, CALLED CONSENT TO TRIAL BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE OR DISTRICT JUDGE. If the parties elect to have the case assigned to a District Judge, Magistrate Judge Lisa Pupo Lenihan will continue to manage the case as provided for in Local Rule 72G. Signed by Magistrate Judge Lisa Pupo Lenihan on 08/07/2018. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Consent Form) (jmb)
August 6, 2018 Filing 3 NOTICE of Appearance by Terri Imbarlina Patak on behalf of REDSTONE PRESBYTERIAN SENIORCARE. (Patak, Terri)
July 26, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 2 ORDER re Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b) Motions to Dismiss, as more fully stated in said order. Signed by Magistrate Judge Lisa Pupo Lenihan on 07/26/2018. (jmb)
July 13, 2018 Filing 1 COMPLAINT against REDSTONE PRESBYTERIAN SENIORCARE (Filing fee, including Administrative fee, $400, receipt number 0315-4794396), filed by COLLEEN M. SAXTON. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet) (ksa)

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 Pennsylvania Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: SAXTON v. REDSTONE PRESBYTERIAN SENIORCARE
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: COLLEEN M. SAXTON
Represented By: Lawrence D. Kerr
Represented By: Marguerite Goglia
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: REDSTONE PRESBYTERIAN SENIORCARE
Represented By: Terri Imbarlina Patak
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?