Rufus v. Pacificorp et al
| Stephen Rufus |
| Pacificorp and International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local Union No. 57 |
| 2:2019cv00377 |
| May 30, 2019 |
| US District Court for the District of Utah |
| Evelyn J Furse |
| Labor: Labor/Mgt. Relations |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1337 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 25, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 12
NOTICE - This case is assigned to a magistrate judge. To consent or request reassignment, use # the form on this link or use the included form for non-efilers and send it toconsents@utd.uscourts.govwithin 15 days or mail to the court with Attention: Consent Clerk on the envelope. Notice e-mailed or mailed to Defendants International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local Union No. 57, Pacificorp, Plaintiff Stephen Rufus. Form due by 8/9/2019. (nl)
|
|
Filing 11
REPORT OF ATTORNEY PLANNING MEETING. (Panico, John)
|
|
Filing 10
PacifiCorp ANSWER to Complaint filed by Pacificorp. Attorney Emily L. Wegener added to party Pacificorp(pty:dft)(Wegener, Emily)
|
|
Filing 9
NOTICE of Appearance by Erik Strindberg on behalf of International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local Union No. 57 (Strindberg, Erik)
|
|
Filing 8
ANSWER to Complaint with Jury Demand filed by International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local Union No. 57.(Thorne, Jonathan)
|
|
Filing 7
NOTICE of Appearance by Jonathan K. Thorne on behalf of International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local Union No. 57 (Thorne, Jonathan)
|
|
Filing 6
ORDER TO PROPOSE SCHEDULE - Plaintiff must propose a schedule to defendant in the form of a draft Attorney Planning Meeting Report within the earlier of fourteen(14) days after any defendant has appeared or twenty-eight (28) days after any defendant has been served with the complaint. See order for additional instructions. Signed by Magistrate Judge Evelyn J. Furse on 5/31/2019. (las)
|
|
Filing 5
**RESTRICTED DOCUMENT**Summons Issued Electronically as to International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local Union No. 57. Instructions to Counsel:1. Click on the document number.2. If you are prompted for an ECF login, enter your 'Attorney' login to CM/ECF.3. Print the issued summons for service. (nl)
|
|
Filing 4
**RESTRICTED DOCUMENT**Summons Issued Electronically as to Pacificorp. Instructions to Counsel:1. Click on the document number.2. If you are prompted for an ECF login, enter your 'Attorney' login to CM/ECF.3. Print the issued summons for service. (nl)
|
|
Filing 3
NOTICE of Appearance by John R. Panico on behalf of Stephen Rufus (Panico, John)
|
|
Filing 2
COMPLAINT against All Defendants (Filing fee $ 400, receipt number 1088-3287174) filed by Stephen Rufus. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet Civil Cover Sheet) Assigned to Magistrate Judge Evelyn J. Furse (Panico, John)
|
|
Filing 1
Case has been indexed and assigned to Magistrate Judge Evelyn J. Furse. Plaintiff Stephen Rufus is directed to E-File the Complaint and cover sheet (found under Complaints and Other Initiating Documents) and pay the filing fee of $ 400.00 by the end of the business day.NOTE: The court will not have jurisdiction until the opening document is electronically filed and the filing fee paid in the CM/ECF system. Civil Summons may be issued electronically. Prepare the summons using the courts #PDF version and email it to utdecf_clerk@utd.uscourts.gov for issuance. (nl)
|
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 Utah 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.
