Catlin Syndicate, Limited v. Implicity Management Company
| Catlin Syndicate, Limited |
| Implicity Management Company |
| 5:2018cv01185 |
| November 14, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Western District of Texas |
| Orlando L Garcia |
| Insurance |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2201 |
| Both |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on January 9, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 10 RESPONSE to Motion, filed by Catlin Syndicate, Limited, re #5 MOTION to Dismiss MOTION to Stay filed by Defendant Implicity Management Company Additional attachments to Doc. #9 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 2-E to 2-J, #2 Exhibit 3, #3 Exhibit 4, #4 Exhibit 5, #5 Proposed Order)(Wood, D.) |
| Filing 9 RESPONSE to Motion, filed by Catlin Syndicate, Limited, re #5 MOTION to Dismiss MOTION to Stay filed by Defendant Implicity Management Company (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1, #2 Exhibit 2, #3 Exhibit 2-A, #4 Exhibit 2-B to 2-D)(Wood, D.) |
| Filing 8 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Catlin Syndicate, Limited. Implicity Management Company served on 12/4/2018, answer due 12/25/2018. (Wood, D.) |
Filing 7
Order for Scheduling Recommendations. Parties shall submit a proposed scheduling order to the Court within forty-five (45) days of the filing of this Order. Notice of right to consent to disposition of a civil case by a U.S. Magistrate Judge.. Signed by Chief Judge Orlando L. Garcia. (mgr)
|
| Filing 6 Defendant's ANSWER to #1 Complaint with Jury Demand by Implicity Management Company.(Loree, Robert) |
| Filing 5 MOTION to Dismiss by Implicity Management Company. (Attachments: #1 Affidavit Exhibit 1, #2 Exhibit 1-A, #3 Exhibit 1-B, #4 Exhibit 1-C, #5 Exhibit 1-D, #6 Exhibit 1-E)(Loree, Robert). Added MOTION to Stay on 12/27/2018 (rf). |
| Filing 4 Summons Issued as to Implicity Management Company. (aej) |
| If ordered by the court, all referrals will be assigned to Magistrate Judge Farrer (aej) |
| Case assigned to Chief Judge Orlando L. Garcia. CM WILL NOW REFLECT THE JUDGE INITIALS AS PART OF THE CASE NUMBER. PLEASE APPEND THESE JUDGE INITIALS TO THE CASE NUMBER ON EACH DOCUMENT THAT YOU FILE IN THIS CASE. (aej) |
| Filing 3 JS44 (Civil Cover Sheet) submitted by Catlin Syndicate, Limited. (Wood, D.) |
| Filing 2 REQUEST FOR ISSUANCE OF SUMMONS by Catlin Syndicate, Limited. (Wood, D.) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT ( Filing fee $ 400 receipt number 0542-11452769), filed by Catlin Syndicate, Limited.(Wood, D.) |
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 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: Catlin Syndicate, Limited v. Implicity Management Company | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Catlin Syndicate, Limited | |
| Represented By: | D. Christene Wood |
| 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: Implicity Management Company | |
| Represented By: | Robert W. Loree |
| 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.
