Kram v. National Railroad Passenger Corp.
David M. Kram |
National Railroad Passenger Corporation and Amtrak |
2:2020cv02177 |
October 29, 2020 |
US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
Morrison C England |
Kendall J Newman |
Federal Employer's Liability |
45 U.S.C. ยง 51 |
None |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on December 20, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
![]() |
Filing 6 PRO HAC VICE APPLICATION and PROPOSED ORDER submitted by David M. Kram for attorney James K. Vucinovich to appear Pro Hac Vice. (Filing fee $ 225, receipt number 0972-9274526) (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Certificate of Good Standing)(Cohen, C.N.) |
Filing 5 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT by Defendant National Railroad Passenger Corporation. (Schroeder, Jeremy) |
Filing 4 ANSWER with Jury Demand by National Railroad Passenger Corporation. Attorney Schroeder, Jeremy James added.(Schroeder, Jeremy) |
Filing 3 CIVIL NEW CASE DOCUMENTS ISSUED; (Attachments: #1 Consent Form, #2 VDRP) (Benson, A.) |
Filing 2 SUMMONS ISSUED as to *National Railroad Passenger Corporation* with answer to complaint due within *21* days. Attorney * C.N. Coby Cohen* *Rossi Vucinovich PC* *1000 2nd Ave., Suite 1780* *Seattle, WA 98104-3612*. (Benson, A.) |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants by David M. Kram. (Filing fee $ 400, receipt number 0972-9212058) Attorney Cohen, C.N. Coby added. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Cohen, C.N.) Mo |
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.