K.G. Trucking, Inc. v. Rush Truck Centers of California, Inc. et al
| K.G. Trucking, Inc. |
| Does 1 through 25, Rush Truck Centers of California, Inc. and Rush Truck Centers of California, Inc. doing business as Rush Truck Center, San Diego |
| 3:2018cv00718 |
| April 11, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of California |
| San Diego Office |
| San Diego |
| Jill L Burkhardt |
| Marilyn L Huff |
| Other Fraud |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 fr |
| Defendant |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on April 11, 2018. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 2 NOTICE of Party With Financial Interest by Rush Truck Centers of California, Inc.. Identifying Corporate Parent Rush Enterprises, Inc. for Rush Truck Centers of California, Inc.. (jms) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL with Jury Demand from Superior Court of California County of San Diego, Central Division, case number 37-2018-00012721-CU-FR-CTL. ( Filing fee $ 400 receipt number 0974-11105901)Filed by Rush Truck Centers of California, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Exhibit A to Notice of Removal of Action, #3 Declaration of Joseph J. Kagan in Support of Defendants Notice of Removal, #4 Demand for Jury Trial, #5 Proof of Service)The new case number is 3:18-cv-718-H-JLB. Judge Marilyn L. Huff and Magistrate Judge Jill L. Burkhardt are assigned to the case.(jms)(sjt). |
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 Southern 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.
