(PC) Thorpe v. Parham et al
| Renell Thorpe |
| C. Parham, Shitzner and C. King |
| 2:2020cv01923 |
| September 25, 2020 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Kendall J Newman |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 22, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 6
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 10/22/2020 REMANDING CASE to Superior Court of California, County of Amador, Case No. 19-CVC-11424. Certified copy of remand order sent to other court. CASE CLOSED. (Henshaw, R)
|
| SERVICE BY MAIL: #6 Order served on Renell Thorpe. Certified copy of remand order sent to Superior Court of California, County of Amador. (Henshaw, R) |
| Filing 5 REPLY by C. King, Shitzner re #4 Opposition. (Zohar, Shiran) |
| Filing 4 OPPOSITION by Plaintiff Renell Thorpe to #1 Notice of Removal. (Becknal, R) |
| Filing 3 PRISONER NEW CASE DOCUMENTS and ORDER RE CONSENT ISSUED; Consent or Decline due by 10/29/2020 (Attachments: #1 Litigant Letter) (Benson, A.) |
| Filing 2 CERTIFICATE of SERVICE by C. King, Shitzner re #1 Notice of Removal. (Zohar, Shiran) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE of REMOVAL from Amador County Superior Court, case number 19-CVC-11424 by Shitzner/Schichner and King. (Filing fee $ 400, receipt number 0972-9140191) (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Proof of Service)(Zohar, Shiran) |
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.
