Sekulovski v. Commerce Township et al
| Liliana Sekulovski |
| Commerce Township and Jay James |
| 2:2021cv10792 |
| April 8, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan |
| Curtis Ivy |
| David M Lawson |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on August 1, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 4
ANSWER to Complaint with Affirmative Defenses and Appearance by All Defendants. (Attachments: #1 Document Continuation Answer, #2 Index of Exhibits, #3 Exhibit A, #4 Document Continuation Affirmative Defenses, #5 Document Continuation Cert of Service) (Landry, David)
|
|
Filing 3
SUMMONS Issued for *Jay James* (DAll)
|
|
Filing 2
SUMMONS Issued for *Commerce Township* (DAll)
|
|
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 (DAll)
|
|
Filing 1
COMPLAINT filed by Liliana Sekulovski against All Defendants with Jury Demand. Plaintiff requests summons issued. Receipt No: AMIEDC-8418813 - Fee: $ 402. County of 1st Plaintiff: Oakland - County Where Action Arose: Oakland - County of 1st Defendant: Oakland. [Previously dismissed case: No] [Possible companion case(s): None] (Attachments: #1 Exhibit) (Dunn, Celeste)
|
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.
