Shaha v. Otis Elevator Company
| Patricia Shaha |
| Otis Elevator Company |
| 4:2023cv00038 |
| January 17, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas |
| Kristine G Baker |
| Personal Inj. Prod. Liability |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 Petition for Removal- Product Liability |
| Both |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 2, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 7
ORDER granting #6 motion for pro hac vice admission of Nathan Drew Kemp. Signed by Judge Kristine G. Baker on 3/2/2023. (jbh)
|
| Filing 6 MOTION for Leave to Appear pro hac vice by Nathan Drew Kemp. Fee $100 receipt number AAREDC-4461550. Filed by Otis Elevator Company (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1- Affidavit of Nathan Drew Kemp in Support of Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission)(Jones, Alexander) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE of Appearance by Alexander Taylor Jones on behalf of Otis Elevator Company (Jones, Alexander) |
| Filing 4 ANSWER to #2 Complaint with Jury Demand by Otis Elevator Company.(Wilson, Kyle) |
| Filing 3 Corporate Disclosure Statement (Rule 7.1) by Otis Elevator Company. (llg) |
| Filing 2 COMPLAINT with Jury Demand against Otis Elevator Company filed by Patricia Shaha. (llg) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL by Otis Elevator Company from Pulaski County Circuit Court, case number 60CV-22-08459. Filing Fee of $402 paid, receipt number LIT655. (Attachment: #1 Civil Cover Sheet) (llg) |
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.
