(BK) In Re: Nadia Kostyuk
Nadia Kostyuk |
Office of the U.S. Trustee (Sac) and David Cusick |
BBV Profit Sharing Plan |
2:2018cv03256 |
December 21, 2018 |
US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
Morrison C England |
Bankruptcy Appeal (801) |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1334 |
None |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on January 24, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 5 JUDGMENT dated *1/24/19* pursuant to order signed by District Judge Morrison C. England, Jr on 1/23/19. (Coll, A) |
Filing 4 ORDER signed by District Judge Morrison C. England, Jr on 1/23/19 DENYING #3 Ex Parte Application for Stay Pending Appeal and DISMISSING #1 Appeal. CASE CLOSED. (Coll, A) |
SERVICE BY MAIL: #4 Order and #5 Judgment served on Harris Lindley Cohen. (Coll, A) |
Filing 3 EX PARTE APPLICATION by Nadia Kostyuk for Ex Parte for Stay Pending Appeal. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order)(Young, Julia) |
Filing 2 OPENING LETTER in BANKRUPTCY APPEAL in re Debtor: *Nadia Kostyuk*, Appellant: *Nadia Kostyuk*, Appellee: *BBV Profit Sharing Plan*, USBC #: *18-27039-E-13C*, ADV #: *18-02195*, BAP #: *-*, Bankruptcy Judge: *Ronald H. Sargis*; (Attachments: #1 Bankruptcy Notice) (Becknal, R) |
Filing 1 NOTICE of BANKRUPTCY APPEAL, Bankruptcy Court case number 18-27039 by Nadia Kostyuk. 30-Day Filing Deadline for Bankruptcy Certificate of Record due by 1/25/2019.(Becknal, R) |
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.