Richardson v. Crain Ford of Little Rock LLC et al
| Dane Richardson |
| Capital One Auto Finance and Crain Ford of Little Rock LLC |
| 4:2021cv00126 |
| February 22, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas |
| D P Marshall |
| Contract: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on April 28, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 6
ORDER granting #3 Capital One's motion to dismiss; dismissing without prejudice Richardson's claims against Capital One; and allowing Plaintiff leave to amend. Amended complaint due by 04/16/2021. Signed by Chief Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 03/24/2021. (ajt)
|
| Filing 5 RESPONSE to Motion re #3 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM filed by Dane Richardson. (Mays, Richard) |
| Filing 4 BRIEF IN SUPPORT re #3 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim filed by Capital One Auto Finance. (Meyer, Christopher) |
| Filing 3 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM by Capital One Auto Finance (Meyer, Christopher) |
| Filing 2 COMPLAINT CLASS ACTION filed by Dane Richardson with Jury Demand against All Defendants.(ajt) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL by Capital One Auto Finance from Pulaski County Circuit Court, case number 60CV-20-6803. Fee $402 paid, receipt number LIT080935. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(ajt) |
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.
