Gill v. Miller
Plaintiff: Michael J. Gill
Defendant: Amy Miller
Case Number: 1:2014cv13497
Filed: August 26, 2014
Court: US District Court for the District of Massachusetts
Office: Boston Office
County: Suffolk
Presiding Judge: Nathaniel M. Gorton
Nature of Suit: Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations
Cause of Action: 18 U.S.C. ยง 1964
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
January 28, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 9 Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton: PROCEDURAL ORDER entered. Within 49 days from the date of this order, plaintiff must either serve the defendant or show cause why the this action should not be dismissed pursuant to Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Failure to do so will result in the dismissal of this action without prejudice.(PSSA, 4)
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 Massachusetts District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Gill v. Miller
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Michael J. Gill
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: Amy Miller
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.


Why Is My Information Online?