Haddock v. Tarrant County, Texas et al
| Diane Scott Haddock |
| Tarrant County, Texas and Patricia Baca-Bennett |
| 4:2018cv00817 |
| October 3, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Texas |
| Reed C O'Connor |
| Civil Rights: Employment |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 14, 2018. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 10
ORDER granting #9 Motion to Extend Time to File Response/Reply. It is therefore ORDERED that Plaintiff's deadlines to respond to Defendants' Motions to Dismiss, (ECF Nos. #5 , #7 ), be extended until December 5, 2018. (Ordered by Judge Reed C. O'Connor on 11/14/2018) (skg)
|
| Filing 9 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply to #7 MOTION to Dismiss AND BRIEF IN SUPPORT, #5 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim filed by Diane Scott Haddock (Taylor, Walter) |
| Filing 8 CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PERSONS/DISCLOSURE STATEMENT by Patricia Baca-Bennett. (Walton, Benjamin) |
| Filing 7 MOTION to Dismiss AND BRIEF IN SUPPORT filed by Patricia Baca-Bennett with Brief/Memorandum in Support. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order)Attorney Benjamin Sheffield Walton added to party Patricia Baca-Bennett(pty:dft) (Walton, Benjamin) |
| Filing 6 Appendix in Support filed by Tarrant County, Texas re #5 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim (Attachments: #1 Exhibit(s) TC Exhibit 1) (Ogle, Melvin) |
| Filing 5 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim filed by Tarrant County, Texas with Brief/Memorandum in Support. (Ogle, Melvin) |
| Filing 4 CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PERSONS/DISCLOSURE STATEMENT by Tarrant County, Texas. (Ogle, Melvin) |
| Filing 3 Summons Issued as to Patricia Baca-Bennett, Tarrant County, Texas. (Attachments: #1 Summons) (bdb) |
| Filing 2 New Case Notes: A filing fee has been paid. File to: Judge O Connor. Pursuant to Misc. Order 6, Plaintiff is provided the Notice of Right to Consent to Proceed Before A U.S. Magistrate Judge. Clerk to provide copy to plaintiff if not received electronically. (bdb) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT WITH JURY DEMAND against All Defendants filed by Diane Scott Haddock. (Filing fee $400; Receipt number 0539-9493746) Clerk to issue summons(es). In each Notice of Electronic Filing, the judge assignment is indicated, and a link to the # Judges Copy Requirements is provided. The court reminds the filer that any required copy of this and future documents must be delivered to the judge, in the manner prescribed, within three business days of filing. Unless exempted, attorneys who are not admitted to practice in the Northern District of Texas must seek admission promptly. Forms, instructions, and exemption information may be found at www.txnd.uscourts.gov, or by clicking here: # Attorney Information - Bar Membership. If admission requirements are not satisfied within 21 days, the clerk will notify the presiding judge. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit(s) 1, #2 Exhibit(s) 2, #3 Exhibit(s) 3, #4 Exhibit(s) 4, #5 Exhibit(s) 5, #6 Exhibit(s) 6, #7 Exhibit(s) 7, #8 Exhibit(s) 8, #9 Exhibit(s) 9, #10 Exhibit(s) 10, #11 Exhibit(s) 11, #12 Exhibit(s) 12, #13 Exhibit(s) 13, #14 Exhibit(s) 14, #15 Exhibit(s) 15, #16 Exhibit(s) 16, #17 Exhibit(s) 17, #18 Exhibit(s) 18, #19 Exhibit(s) 19, #20 Exhibit(s) 20, #21 Exhibit(s) 21, #22 Exhibit(s) 22, #23 Exhibit(s) 23) (Taylor, Walter) Modified restriction level per defendant on 10/16/2018 (bdb). |
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 Texas 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.
