Emerick v. Connecticut et al
Roger Emerick |
Antonio Robaina, Susan Peck and State of Connecticut |
3:2018cv01766 |
October 26, 2018 |
US District Court for the District of Connecticut |
Stefan R Underhill |
Civil Rights: Other |
42 U.S.C. § 1983 |
Plaintiff |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on March 15, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 15 ORDER granting #14 Motion for Extension of Time until December 28, 2018 to file initial pleading to the Plaintiffs Complaint. Signed by Judge Stefan R Underhill on 11/28/2018. (Smith, E) |
Answer deadline updated for All Defendants to 12/28/2018. (Smith, E) |
Filing 14 MOTION for Extension of Time by State of Connecticut, Susan Peck, Antonio Robaina. (Stone, Alayna) |
Filing 13 NOTICE of Appearance by Alayna Michelle Stone on behalf of State of Connecticut, Susan Peck, Antonio Robaina (Stone, Alayna) |
Filing 12 ELECTRONIC FILING ORDER - PLEASE ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH COURTESY COPY REQUIREMENTS IN THIS ORDER. SELF-REPRESENTED FILERS ARE REQUIRED TO COMPLY WITH THE JUDGE'S STANDARD ELECTRONIC FILING ORDER WHICH IS ATTACHED. Signed by Judge Stefan R Underhill on 10/29/2018. (Oliver, T.) |
Filing 11 ORDER granting #8 Motion to Participate in Electronic Filing. Signed by Judge Stefan R Underhill on 10/26/2018. (Smith, E) |
Filing 10 NOTICE TO COUNSEL/SELF-REPRESENTED PARTIES : Counsel or self-represented parties initiating or removing this action are responsible for serving all parties with attached documents and copies of #3 Protective Order, #2 Order on Pretrial Deadlines, #9 Consent to Electronic Notice filed by Roger Emerick, #1 Complaint filed by Roger Emerick, #4 Electronic Filing Order, #8 MOTION for Particiapte in Order filed by Roger Emerick Signed by Clerk on 10/26/2018.(Enderlin, M.) |
Filing 9 Consent to Electronic Notice by Roger Emerick (Enderlin, M.) |
Filing 8 MOTION to Participate in Electronic Filing by Roger Emerick. (Enderlin, M.) |
Filing 7 ELECTRONIC SUMMONS ISSUED in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 and LR 4 as to *Susan Peck* with answer to complaint due within *21* days. *Roger Emerick* *580 Hopewell Road* *South Glastonbury, CT 06073*. (Enderlin, M.) |
Filing 6 ELECTRONIC SUMMONS ISSUED in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 and LR 4 as to *Antonio Robaina* with answer to complaint due within *21* days. *Roger Emerick* *580 Hopewell Road* *South Glastonbury, CT 06073*. (Enderlin, M.) |
Filing 5 ELECTRONIC SUMMONS ISSUED in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 and LR 4 as to *State of Connecticut* with answer to complaint due within *21* days. *Roger Emerick* *580 Hopewell Road* *South Glastonbury, CT 06073*. (Enderlin, M.) |
Filing 4 ELECTRONIC FILING ORDER FOR COUNSEL - PLEASE ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH COURTESY COPY REQUIREMENTS IN THIS ORDER Signed by Judge Stefan R Underhill on 10/26/2018.(Enderlin, M.) |
Filing 3 STANDING PROTECTIVE ORDER Signed by Judge Stefan R Underhill on 10/26/2018.(Enderlin, M.) |
Filing 2 Order on Pretrial Deadlines: Amended Pleadings due by 12/25/2018 Discovery due by 4/27/2019 Dispositive Motions due by 6/1/2019 Signed by Clerk on 10/26/2018.(Enderlin, M.) |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants, filed by Roger Emerick.(Enderlin, M.) |
Filing fee received from Roger Emerick: $ 400.00, receipt number CTXH00014766 (Enderlin, M.) |
Request for Clerk to issue summons as to State of Connecticut. (Enderlin, M.) |
Request for Clerk to issue summons as to Susan Peck. (Enderlin, M.) |
Request for Clerk to issue summons as to Antonio Robaina. (Enderlin, M.) |
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 Connecticut 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.