Pandit v. Pandit et al
| Subodh K Pandit |
| Meshach V Samuel, Sudhir K Pandit, Dorothy Pandit and Cathaline R Samuel |
| 4:2019cv00124 |
| February 15, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas |
| Billy Roy Wilson |
| Assault Libel & Slander |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 1, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 5
(This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no pdf document associated with this entry.) ORDER granting #4 Plaintiff's Motion for Voluntary Dismissal. Accordingly, this case is DISMISSED without prejudice. Signed by Judge Billy Roy Wilson on 03/01/19. (dmm)
|
| Filing 4 NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal Without Prejudice by Subodh K Pandit (jap) |
| Summons Issued and returned to plaintiff Subodh Pandit as to Cathaline R Samuel, Meshach V Samuel. (jap) |
|
Filing 3
(This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no pdf document associated with this entry.) ORDER denying #2 Plaintiff's Motion to Stay. Signed by Judge Billy Roy Wilson on 02/25/19. (dmm)
|
| Filing 2 MOTION to Stay by Subodh K Pandit. (ljb) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF with Jury Demand against All Defendants filed by Subodh K Pandit. (Fee of $400 paid, Receipt #LIT070875.) (ljb) |
| Summons Issued as to Dorothy Pandit, Sudhir K Pandit and returned to plaintiff for service. (ljb) |
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 Arkansas Eastern 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.
