Huntington National Bank v. Infinite Education Services, Inc. et al
Plaintiff: Huntington National Bank
Defendant: Infinite Education Services, Inc. and Charles Hill
Case Number: 0:2022cv00237
Filed: January 28, 2022
Court: US District Court for the District of Minnesota
Presiding Judge: Hildy Bowbeer
Referring Judge: Eric C Tostrud
Nature of Suit: Contract: Other
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on October 24, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
March 18, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 9 NOTICE by Huntington National Bank re #8 Order to Party File Document/Respond to Court (Schroeder, Mark)
March 14, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 8 ORDER FOR PARTY TO FILE DOCUMENT/RESPOND TO COURT. See order for details. Signed by Magistrate Judge Hildy Bowbeer on 3/14/2022.(LNP)
February 18, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 7 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Huntington National Bank. Infinite Education Services, Inc. served on 2/13/2022, answer due 3/7/2022. (Schroeder, Mark)
January 31, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 6 (Text-Only) NOTICE - Magistrate Judge Hildy Bowbeer's Practice Pointers are available on the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota's #website. All parties are expected to be familiar with and adhere to these Practice Pointers, including any variances from Local Rules. (LNP)
January 29, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 5 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Huntington National Bank. Charles Hill served on 1/28/2022, answer due 2/18/2022. (Schroeder, Mark)
January 28, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 4 Summons Issued as to Charles Hill, Infinite Education Services, Inc. (KDS)
January 28, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 3 (Text-Only) CLERK'S NOTICE OF INITIAL CASE ASSIGNMENT. Case assigned to Judge Eric C. Tostrud per Civil (3rd, 4th - Master) list, referred to Magistrate Judge Hildy Bowbeer. Please use case number 22-cv-237 ECT/HB. (KDS)
January 28, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 2 RULE 7.1 DISCLOSURE STATEMENT. Parent corporation, publicly held corporation or wholly-owned subsidiary reported for Plaintiff Huntington National Bank. (Schroeder, Mark)
January 28, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Charles Hill, Infinite Education Services, Inc. (filing fee $ 402, receipt number AMNDC-9293341) filed by Huntington National Bank. Filer requests summons issued. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit(s) A-I, #2 Civil Cover Sheet) (Schroeder, Mark)

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 Minnesota District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Huntington National Bank v. Infinite Education Services, Inc. et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Huntington National Bank
Represented By: Daniel N Moak
Represented By: Mark G Schroeder
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 ]
Defendant: Infinite Education Services, Inc.
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 ]
Defendant: Charles Hill
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.


Why Is My Information Online?