Stull v. Veoneer Inc. et al
| Mark Stull |
| Veoneer Inc., Jan Carlson, Robert W. Alspaugh, Mary Louise Cummings, Dermot Mark Durcan, James M. Ringler, Kazuhiko Sakamoto, Jonas G. Synnergren and Wolfgang Ziebart |
| 2:2021cv12224 |
| September 21, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan |
| Kimberly G Altman |
| Terrence G Berg |
| Stockholders Suits |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 30, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 4 AMENDED COMPLAINT with Jury Demand filed by Mark Stull against All Defendants. NO NEW PARTIES ADDED. (Fink, David) |
| Filing 3 NOTICE of Appearance by Nathan J. Fink on behalf of Mark Stull. (Fink, Nathan) |
| Filing 2 SUMMONS Issued for * All Defendants * (TTho) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT filed by Mark Stull against All Defendants with Jury Demand. Plaintiff requests summons issued. Receipt No: AMIEDC-8623408 - Fee: $ 402. County of 1st Plaintiff: Out of State - County Where Action Arose: Oakland - County of 1st Defendant: Oakland. [Previously dismissed case: No] [Possible companion case(s): None] (Fink, David) |
| 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 (TTho) |
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.
