Kasper v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company et al
| Robert G Kasper and Robert G. Kasper |
| State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, Home-Owners Insurance Company, NESTLE USA NESCARE PLAN and NESTLE USA SHORT-TERM DISABILITY PLAN FOR NONUNION HOURLY EMPLOYEES |
| 1:2023cv00595 |
| June 8, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Western District of Michigan |
| Robert J Jonker |
| Ray Kent |
| Labor: E.R.I.S.A. |
| 29 U.S.C. ยง 1132 E.R.I.S.A.-Employee Benefits |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on June 9, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 4 SUMMONS ISSUED as to defendants Home-Owners Insurance Company, Nestle USA NesCare Plan, Nestle USA Short-Term Disability Plan for Nonunion Hourly Employees, State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company (mg) |
| Filing 3 NOTICE that this case has been assigned to Robert J. Jonker (mg) |
| Filing 2 PROPOSED SUMMONS to be issued re #1 (Shafer, David) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT with jury demand against Home-Owners Insurance Company, Nestle USA NesCare Plan, Nestle USA Short-Term Disability Plan for Nonunion Hourly Employees, State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company filed by Robert G Kasper (Shafer, David) Modified text on 6/9/2023 (mg). |
| FILING FEE PAID re #1 by plaintiff Robert G Kasper in the amount of $402, receipt number BMIWDC-7079873 (Shafer, David) |
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 Western 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.
