BELL v. WEINSTOCK, FRIEDMAN & FRIEDMAN, P.A. et al
| Ma Shun Bell |
| WEINSTOCK, FRIEDMAN & FRIEDMAN, P.A. and Friedman, Framme & Thrush, P.A. |
| 1:2019cv03678 |
| December 10, 2019 |
| US District Court for the District of Columbia |
| Timothy J Kelly |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 15 U.S.C. ยง 1692 |
| Both |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on December 13, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 5 NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by MA SHUN BELL (Dennis, Radi) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE to Counsel/Party re #1 Notice of Removal (zmc) |
| Case assigned to Judge Timothy J. Kelly. (zmc) |
| Filing 3 CIVIL COVER SHEET by FRIEDMAN, FRAMME & THRUSH, P.A., WEINSTOCK, FRIEDMAN & FRIEDMAN, P.A. filed by FRIEDMAN, FRAMME & THRUSH, P.A., WEINSTOCK, FRIEDMAN & FRIEDMAN, P.A..(Ross, David) |
| Filing 2 NOTICE OF RELATED CASE by Friedman, Framme & Thrush, P.A., WEINSTOCK, FRIEDMAN & FRIEDMAN, P.A.. Case related to Case No. 19-3683. (Ross, David) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from District of Columbia Superior Court, case number 2019 CA 006868 Filing fee $ 400, receipt number ADCDC-6633872 filed by Friedman, Framme & Thrush, P.A., WEINSTOCK, FRIEDMAN & FRIEDMAN, P.A.. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Notice of Filing of Notice of Removal, #2 Superior Court Documents Complaint, #3 Superior Court Documents Remaining Superior Court Documents)(Ross, David) |
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 District Of Columbia 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.
