Terrell et al v. Ford Motor Company et al
| Keith Terrell and Pamela Terrell |
| Ford Motor Company and Hansel Ford Lincoln |
| 2:2018cv01406 |
| May 24, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Sacramento Office |
| Mendocino |
| Deborah Barnes |
| Morrison C England |
| Contract Product Liability |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 Petition For Removal--Other Contract |
| Both |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on August 29, 2018. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| OTHER COURT CASE NUMBER from CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA case number 2:18-cv-07224. (Robles, S) |
| Filing 6 MDL ORDER. CASE TRANSFERRED to the Central District of California. ELECTRONIC TRANSFER SENT. CASE CLOSED. (Donati, J) |
| Filing 5 CIVIL NEW CASE DOCUMENTS ISSUED; (Attachments: #1 Consent Form, #2 VDRP) (Kastilahn, A) |
| Filing 4 CIVIL COVER SHEET by Ford Motor Company (Lambert, Kristina) |
| Filing 3 DECLARATION of H. Paul Efstratis re #1 Notice of Removal. (Lambert, Kristina) |
| Filing 2 DECLARATION of H. Paul Efstratis re #1 Notice of Removal. (Lambert, Kristina) . |
| Filing 1 NOTICE of REMOVAL from Sacramento Couty Superior Court, case number 34-2018-00231391 by All Plaintiffs. (Filing fee $ 400, receipt number 0972-7678249) (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Certificate of Interested Parties, #4 Certificate of Service)(Lambert, Kristina) |
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 California 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.
