Trustees of the Chicago Regional Council of Carpenters Pension Fund et al v. Kingdom Contracting Inc. et al
| Trustees of the Chicago Regional Council of Carpenters Pension Fund, Chicago Regional Council of Carpenters Supplemental Retirement Fund, Chicago Regional Council of Carpenters Welfare Fund and Chicago Regional Council of Carpenters Apprentice & Trainee Program Fund |
| Kingdom Contracting Inc. and Michael Guerrieri |
| 1:2018cv00153 |
| January 9, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| Chicago Office |
| Cook |
| Edmond E. Chang |
| Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1132 |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
12
MOTION by Plaintiffs Chicago Regional Council of Carpenters Welfare Fund, Chicago Regional Council of Carpenters Apprentice & Trainee Program Fund, Chicago Regional Council of Carpenters Supplemental Retirement Fund, Trustees of the Chicago Regiona l Council of Carpenters Pension Fund to reopen case , MOTION by Plaintiffs Chicago Regional Council of Carpenters Welfare Fund, Chicago Regional Council of Carpenters Apprentice & Trainee Program Fund, Chicago Regional Council of Carpenters Supplemental Retirement Fund, Trustees of the Chicago Regional Council of Carpenters Pension Fund for judgment (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit)(McAnally, Daniel)
|
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 Illinois 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
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.
