Scrushy v. Tucker et al
| Richard M Scrushy |
| Wade Tucker and Encompass Health Corporation |
| 4:2021cv02309 |
| July 16, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Texas |
| Lee H Rosenthal |
| Contract: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on August 18, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 17
ORDER OF DISMISSAL entered. This case is dismissed with prejudice. Case terminated on 8/18/21.(Signed by Chief Judge Lee H Rosenthal) Parties notified.(leddins, 4)
|
|
Filing 16
MEMORANDUM AND OPINION entered: Scrushy's remand motion, (Docket Entry No. 3), is denied. Encompass Health's motion to dismiss, (Docket Entry No. 5), is granted. Dismissal is entered by separate order. (Signed by Chief Judge Lee H Rosenthal) Parties notified.(leddins, 4)
|
|
Filing 15
PROPOSED ORDER Scheduling and Docket Control re: #14 Report of Rule 26(f) Planning Meeting, filed.(Bailey, James)
|
|
Filing 14
REPORT of Rule 26(f) Planning Meeting by Encompass Health Corporation, Wade Tucker, filed.(Bailey, James)
|
|
Filing 13
NOTICE by Richard M Scrushy, filed. (Wiley, Rob)
|
|
Filing 12
STATEMENT by Richard M Scrushy, filed.(Wiley, Rob)
|
|
Filing 11
CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PARTIES by Encompass Health Corporation, Wade Tucker, filed.(Glenos, Nicholas)
|
|
Filing 10
PROPOSED ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF's MOTION to REMAND re: #9 Response in Opposition to Motion, filed.(Glenos, Nicholas)
|
|
Filing 9
RESPONSE in Opposition to #3 First MOTION to Remand, filed by Encompass Health Corporation, Wade Tucker. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit C, #4 Exhibit D, #5 Exhibit E, #6 Exhibit F)(Glenos, Nicholas)
|
|
Filing 8
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE IN A REMOVED ACTION by Encompass Health Corporation, filed.(Glenos, Nicholas)
|
|
Filing 7
NOTICE of Appearance by James Blake Bailey on behalf of Encompass Health Corporation, filed. (Bailey, James)
|
|
Filing 6
PROPOSED ORDER re: #5 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM Pursuant to Rule 12(B)(6), or in the Alternative, to Abstain, filed.(Glenos, Nicholas)
|
|
Filing 5
MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM Pursuant to Rule 12(B)(6), or in the Alternative, to Abstain by Encompass Health Corporation, filed. Motion Docket Date 8/13/2021. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit C, #4 Exhibit D, #5 Exhibit E, #6 Exhibit F, #7 Exhibit G, #8 Exhibit H)(Glenos, Nicholas)
|
|
Filing 4
BRIEF Motion to Remand by Richard M Scrushy, filed.(Wiley, Rob)
|
|
Filing 3
First MOTION to Remand by Richard M Scrushy, filed. Motion Docket Date 8/13/2021. (Wiley, Rob)
|
|
Filing 2
ORDER Scheduling Rule 16 Conference With the Court and Setting Out the Requirements for Initial Pretrial Work. Initial Conference set for 9/1/2021 at 11:50 AM by video before Chief Judge Lee H Rosenthal. A Zoom link will be provided for participation. (Signed by Chief Judge Lee H Rosenthal) (Attachments: #1 Supplement) Parties notified.(leddins, 4)
|
|
Filing 1
NOTICE OF REMOVAL from County Court at Law No. 2 Montgomery County Texas, case number 21-06-08535 (Filing fee $ 402 receipt number 0541-26756123) filed by Encompass Health Corporation. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - Service of Process, #2 Exhibit B - Pleadings, #3 Exhibit C - State Court Docket Sheet, #4 Exhibit D - Index of Filing, #5 Exhibit E - List of Counsel, #6 Exhibit F - Notice to State Court)(Glenos, Nicholas)
|
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 Southern 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.
