SAXTON v. REDSTONE PRESBYTERIAN SENIORCARE
COLLEEN M. SAXTON |
REDSTONE PRESBYTERIAN SENIORCARE |
2:2018cv00918 |
July 13, 2018 |
US District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania |
Pittsburgh Office |
Westmoreland |
Lisa Pupo Lenihan |
Civil Rights: Americans with Disabilities - Employment |
42 U.S.C. ยง 12101 |
Plaintiff |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on September 10, 2018. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 9 CONSENT to Trial/Jurisdiction by US Magistrate Judge OR District Judge Option, by COLLEEN M. SAXTON. (Kerr, Lawrence) |
Filing 8 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer by REDSTONE PRESBYTERIAN SENIORCARE. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order) (Patak, Terri) |
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) |
Filing 6 NOTICE of Appearance by Marguerite Goglia on behalf of COLLEEN M. SAXTON. (Goglia, Marguerite) |
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) |
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) |
Filing 3 NOTICE of Appearance by Terri Imbarlina Patak on behalf of REDSTONE PRESBYTERIAN SENIORCARE. (Patak, Terri) |
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) |
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 Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.