Yanakoweff v. CVS 8103 MI, L.L.C. et al
| Neva Yanakoweff |
| CVS 8103 MI, L.L.C. and CVS Pharmacy, Inc. |
| 2:2020cv10910 |
| April 9, 2020 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan |
| Bernard A Friedman |
| R Steven Whalen |
| P.I.: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
| Both |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on May 20, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 4 ACKNOWLEDGMENT from Oakland County Circuit Court of #3 Notice of Remand. (SOso) |
| Filing 3 NOTICE remanding case to OAKLAND COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT. (DPer) |
Filing 2
STIPULATED ORDER REMANDING CASE to Oakland County Circuit Court. Signed by District Judge Bernard A. Friedman. (DPer)
|
| A United States Magistrate Judge of this Court is available to conduct all proceedings in this civil action in accordance with 28 U.S.C. 636c and FRCP 73. The Notice, Consent, and Reference of a Civil Action to a Magistrate Judge form is available for download at #http://www.mied.uscourts.gov (LGra) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL by All Defendants from Oakland County Circuit Court, case number 2020-180107-NO. Receipt No: MIEDC-7732102 - Fee: $ 400 [Previously dismissed case: No] [Possible companion case(s): None] (Attachments: #1 Index of Exhibits Index of Exhibits, #2 Exhibit A - Summons and Complaint, #3 Exhibit B - Notice of Filing Removal in State Court) (Lynch, Edward) |
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 Michigan Eastern 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.
