Marks v. Chicoine et al
3:2006cv06806 |
November 1, 2006 |
US District Court for the Northern District of California |
San Francisco Office |
Susan Illston |
Other Statutory Actions |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 Petition For Removal--Other Contract |
Plaintiff |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 143 NOTICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE CLOSING (SI, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/4/2009) |
Filing 139 JUDGMENT: Plaintiff's motion for entry of default judgment as to defendant Tom Chicoine is granted. In accordance with Rule 56(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, judgment in the amount of $25,000 is entered in favor of plaintiff and against defeneant Tom Chicoine. (SI, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/29/2009) |
Filing 137 JUDGMENT: Plaintiff's motion for entry of judgment as to defendant Tom Chicoine is granted. Judgement is the amount of $25,000 in entered in favor of plaintiff and against defendant Tom Chicoine. (SI, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/10/2009) |
Filing 131 ORDER RE: PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT. Plaintiff's further documentation is due 2/27/09. (SI, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/11/2009) |
Filing 119 ORDER OF ENTRY OF DEFAULT FOR FAILURE TO SHOW CAUSE. Signed by Judge Alsup on 9/15/08. (ts, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/16/2008) |
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 Northern 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
Search for this case: Marks v. Chicoine et al | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
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.