Legacy Riverdale Apartments, LLC v. Thorpe
| Legacy Riverdale Apartments, LLC doing business as Legacy at Riverdale |
| Mark Thorpe |
| 1:2024cv00780 |
| February 21, 2024 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Georgia |
| Sarah E Geraghty |
| Linda T Walker |
| Rent Lease & Ejectment |
| 15 U.S.C. ยง 1692 Fair Debt Collection Act |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 21, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 6 Case electronically remanded to the Magistrate Court of Clayton County (ane) (ane). |
Filing 5
ORDER ADOPTING #3 Final Report and Recommendation. This case is REMANDED to the Magistrate Court of Clayton County, Georgia. Signed by Judge Sarah E. Geraghty on 3/21/2024. (ane)
|
| Clerk's Certificate of Mailing as to Mark Thorpe re #5 Order. (ane) |
| Civil Case Terminated. (ane) |
| Submission of #3 FINAL REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION to District Judge Sarah E. Geraghty. (sap) |
| Clerk's Certificate of Mailing as to Mark Thorpe re #4 Order for Service of Report and Recommendation, #3 FINAL REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION. (ane) |
|
Filing 4
ORDER for Service of #3 Final Report and Recommendation, by Magistrate Judge Linda T. Walker. Each party may file written objections to the Report & Recommendation within 14 days of service. If no objections are filed, the Report & Recommendation may be adopted as the opinion and order of the District Court. Signed by Magistrate Judge Linda T. Walker on 2/22/2024. (ane)
|
|
Filing 3
ORDER AND FINAL REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION re #2 Notice of Removal, filed by Mark Thorpe. The #1 Application for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis is GRANTED. The Court RECOMMENDS this action be REMANDED to the Magistrate Court of Clayton County. Signed by Magistrate Judge Linda T. Walker on 2/22/2024. (ane)
|
| Filing 2 NOTICE OF REMOVAL with COMPLAINT filed by Mark Thorpe. (Attachments: #1 Petition for Removal, #2 Civil Cover Sheet)(ane) Please visit our website at http://www.gand.uscourts.gov/commonly-used-forms to obtain Pretrial Instructions and Pretrial Associated Forms which includes the Consent To Proceed Before U.S. Magistrate form. |
| Submission of #1 APPLICATION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis, to Magistrate Judge Linda T. Walker. (jkb) |
| Filing 1 APPLICATION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Mark Thorpe. (Attachments: #1 Notice of Removal, #2 Petition for Removal, #3 Civil Cover Sheet)(jkb) |
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 Georgia 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: Legacy Riverdale Apartments, LLC v. Thorpe | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Legacy Riverdale Apartments, LLC doing business as Legacy at Riverdale | |
| Represented By: | Elizabeth Loraine Edwards Colston |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant: Mark Thorpe | |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | 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.
