ERHART v. ERHART
BRADLEY ERHART |
NANCY ERHART |
1:2021cv01829 |
June 21, 2021 |
US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana |
Tim A Baker |
Tanya Walton Pratt |
Contract: Other |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
None |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on August 10, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 14 Certificate of Service re #13 Answer to Complaint, filed by Defendant NANCY ERHART. (Smith, Phillip) Modified on 8/11/2021 to describe document filed (LBT). |
Filing 13 ANSWER to #1 Complaint , filed by NANCY ERHART.(Smith, Phillip) |
Filing 12 SCHEDULING ORDER: Initial Pretrial Conference set for 9/27/2021 10:30 AM (Eastern Time) in Telephonic before Magistrate Judge Tim A. Baker. Plaintiff shall participate in this conference by calling the Court at 317-229-3660. Defendant shall participate in this conference by counsel. The information needed by counsel of record to participate in this telephonic conference will be provided by separate notification. If a proposed Case Management Plan ("CMP") has not yet been filed, the parties shall tender a proposed CMP no less than 3 days prior to the pretrial conference. See Order for additional information. Copy to Plaintiff via US Mail. Signed by Magistrate Judge Tim A. Baker on 8/9/2021.(SWM) |
Filing 11 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by BRADLEY ERHART re #8 MOTION to Object. (AKH) |
Filing 10 ORDER denying #8 Motion to object (marginal entry). Signed by Magistrate Judge Tim A. Baker on 7/16/2021 Copy sent to Mr. Erhart via US Mail (CBU) |
Filing 9 MARGINAL ENTRY-Notice of extension of time, Plaintiff objected, but that objection is overruled. Deadline to respond is enlarged to 8/10/2021. Signed by Magistrate Judge Tim A. Baker on 7/16/2021 Copy sent to Mr. Erhart via US Mail (CBU) |
Filing 8 MOTION to Object to #7 Defendant's Notice of Extension of Time, filed by Plaintiff BRADLEY ERHART. (AKH) |
Filing 7 NOTICE of Parties' First Extension of Time re Filing a response to pleading defined by Fed. R. Civ. P. 7(a), filed by Defendant NANCY ERHART. (Smith, Phillip) |
Filing 6 NOTICE of Appearance by Phillip Charles Smith on behalf of Defendant NANCY ERHART. (Smith, Phillip) |
Filing 5 RETURN of Personal Service. NANCY ERHART served on 6/22/2021. (LBT) |
Filing 4 Summons Issued as to NANCY ERHART. (REO) |
Filing 3 RECEIPT #IP074533 for filing fee in the amount of $402.00, paid by Plaintiff. (REO) |
Filing 2 MAGISTRATE JUDGE's NOTICE of Availability to Exercise Jurisdiction issued. (DJH) |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT against NANCY ERHART, filed by BRADLEY ERHART. (No fee paid with this filing) (Attachments: #1 Proposed Summons)(DJH) |
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 Indiana 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
Search for this case: ERHART v. ERHART | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Defendant: NANCY ERHART | |
Represented By: | Phillip Charles Smith |
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 ] |
Plaintiff: BRADLEY ERHART | |
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.