Ibarra v. Walmart Inc.
| Mary Ibarra |
| Walmart Inc. and Wal-Mart Stores Texas, LLC |
| 4:2023cv01239 |
| December 13, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Texas |
| Mark Pittman |
| Torts/Pers Inj: Other Personal Injury |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 Notice of Removal |
| Both |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on January 22, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| ***Clerk's Notice of delivery: (see NEF for details) Docket No:8. Mon Jan 22 08:18:24 CST 2024 (crt) |
Filing 8
ORDER: Before the Court is the Parties' Agreed #7 Stipulation to Remand Case to State Court in the above-styled and numbered action. The Court GRANTS the Stipulation. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that this case is REMANDED to the 17th Judicial District Court of Tarrant County, Texas. (Ordered by Judge Mark Pittman on 1/19/2024) (Attachments: #1 remand) (mmw)
|
| Filing 7 Agreed STIPULATION to Remand Case to State Court by Walmart Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order) (Davis, Derek) |
| Filing 6 AMENDED COMPLAINT against Mary Ibarra filed by Mary Ibarra. 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. (Nikkels, Hailey) |
| Filing 5 Interim STATUS REPORT and Proposal for Contents of Scheduling filed by Walmart Inc.. (Davis, Derek) |
|
Filing 4
ORDER: Proposed Scheduling Order due by 1/8/2024. (Ordered by Judge Mark Pittman on 12/18/2023) (sre)
|
|
Filing 3
ORDER: Amended Complaint due by 1/8/2024. Response due by 1/22/2024. (Ordered by Judge Mark Pittman on 12/18/2023) (sre)
|
| ***Clerk's Notice of delivery: (see NEF for details) Docket No:3,4. Mon Dec 18 10:29:20 CST 2023 (crt) |
| ***Clerk's Notice of delivery: (see NEF for details) Docket No:2. Mon Dec 18 10:31:49 CST 2023 (crt) |
| Filing 2 New Case Notes: A filing fee has been paid. File to: Judge Pittman. 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. Attorneys are further reminded that, if necessary, they must comply with Local Rule 83.10(a) within 14 days or risk the possible dismissal of this case without prejudice or without further notice. (sre) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL WITH JURY DEMAND filed by Walmart Inc.. (Filing fee $405; receipt number ATXNDC-14242883) In each Notice of Electronic Filing, the judge assignment is indicated, and a link to the # Judges Copy Requirements and # Judge Specific 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 and Instructions 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 Cover Sheet, #2 Cover Sheet Supplement, #3 Exhibit(s)) (Davis, Derek) |
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.
