Schultz v. Chapman Scottsdale Autoplex LLC
David Schultz |
Chapman Scottsdale Autoplex LLC doing business as Chapman Dodge Chrysler Jeep Ram |
2:2021cv00051 |
January 12, 2021 |
US District Court for the District of Arizona |
Camille D Bibles |
Susan M Brnovich |
Other Statutes: Other Statutory Actions |
15 U.S.C. § 1681 |
Both |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on February 24, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
|
|
|
Filing 12 MINUTE ORDER: Pursuant to Local Rule 3.7(b), a request has been received for a random reassignment of this case to a District Judge. FURTHER ORDERED Case reassigned by random draw to Judge Susan M Brnovich. All further pleadings/papers should now list the following COMPLETE case number: CV-21-0051-PHX-SMB. This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no PDF document associated with this entry. (MAP) |
Filing 11 Party Elects Assignment of Case to District Judge Jurisdiction. This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no PDF document associated with this entry. (MAP) |
Filing 9 Magistrate Election Form Deadline. (Attachments: #1 Consent Form)(MAP) |
Filing 8 ANSWER to #1 Complaint with Jury Demand by Chapman Scottsdale Autoplex LLC.(Ingold, Susanne) |
Filing 7 SERVICE EXECUTED filed by David Schultz: Proof of Service re: Summons and Complaint upon Chapman Scottsdale Autoplex LLC on February 1, 2021. (Fabian, Veronika) |
Filing 6 Agreement to Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction. Party agrees to Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction. This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no PDF document associated with this entry. (MAP) |
Filing 4 Summons Issued as to Chapman Scottsdale Autoplex LLC. (REM). *** IMPORTANT: When printing the summons, select "Document and stamps" or "Document and comments" for the seal to appear on the document. |
Filing 3 Filing fee paid, receipt number 0970-19052599. This case has been assigned to the Honorable Camille D. Bibles. All future pleadings or documents should bear the correct case number: CV-21-00051-PHX-CDB. Magistrate Election form attached. (REM) |
Filing 2 SUMMONS Submitted by David Schultz.(Fabian, Veronika) (REM) |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT. Filing fee received: $ 402.00, receipt number 0970-19052599 filed by David Schultz.(Fabian, Veronika) (Attachments: #1 Exhibit, #2 Exhibit, #3 Exhibit, #4 Exhibit, #5 Exhibit, #6 Exhibit, #7 Exhibit, #8 Exhibit, #9 Exhibit, #10 Exhibit, #11 Exhibit, #12 Exhibit, #13 Exhibit, #14 Civil Cover Sheet)(REM) |
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 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
Search for this case: Schultz v. Chapman Scottsdale Autoplex LLC | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Defendant: Chapman Scottsdale Autoplex LLC doing business as Chapman Dodge Chrysler Jeep Ram | |
Represented By: | Susanne Elizabeth Ingold |
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 ] |
Plaintiff: David Schultz | |
Represented By: | Hyung Sik Choi |
Represented By: | Veronika Fabian |
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.