SUSANA BROWN v. U.S. HOUSING & URBAN DEVELOPMENT et al
| SUSANA BROWN |
| U.S. HOUSING & URBAN DEVELOPMENT, CITY OF PHOENIX HOUSING DEPARTMENT and MATHEW HENSON APTS |
| 2:2009cv02011 |
| September 25, 2009 |
| US District Court for the District of Arizona |
| Phoenix Division Office |
| Maricopa |
| Lawrence O Anderson |
| None |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1442 Petition for Removal |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
26
ORDER granting pla's 15 request that the case be dismissed without prejudice and hereby dismissing this case without prejudice. The Clerk is directed to terminate this case in its entirety. FURTHER ORDERED that all other pending motions, docket #3 and 22, are DENIED as moot. Signed by Magistrate Judge Lawrence O Anderson on 11/8/2009.(LAD)
|
|
Filing
12
ORDER that counsel for the Government shall promptly file an amended list of the required state court filings, filed before September 25, 2009, and true and complete copies thereof, including the Answer filed on September 11, 2009 of Defendants City of Phoenix Housing Department and Matthew Henson Apartments; the affidavits of service of process, purportedly docketed on September 16,2009; and any other documents required by 28 U.S.c. § 1446(a) not already provided as an exhibit to its Notice of Removal. Signed by Magistrate Judge Lawrence O Anderson on 10/13/09. (DMT, )
|
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 Arizona 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.
