Neely v. Flores et al
| Judy Neely |
| Jose Flores and John Does 1-10 |
| 3:2022cv00130 |
| June 30, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi |
| Glen H Davidson |
| Roy Percy |
| Assault Libel & Slander |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Libel,Assault,Slander |
| Both |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on August 24, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 7
INITIAL ORDER - RULE 16.1 Case Management Conference set for 10/3/2022 10:00 AM in Oxford Tele-Conference before Magistrate Judge Roy Percy. Signed by Magistrate Judge Roy Percy on 8/24/22. (rtc)
|
| Filing 6 ANSWER to #1 Complaint with Jury Demand Answer & Affirmative Defenses by Jose Flores. (Fleitas, Victor) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by Victor Israel Fleitas on behalf of Jose Flores (Fleitas, Victor) |
| Filing 4 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Matthew D. Wilson on behalf of Judy Neely Jose Flores served on 8/3/2022. (Wilson, Matthew) |
| Filing 3 CLERK'S NOTICE of Incomplete Process as to Jose Flores. (jla) |
| Filing 2 Summons Issued as to Jose Flores, forwarded to Attorney for service. (jla) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT, Jury Demand, Filing fee $ 402, receipt number AMSNDC-2114550, filed by Judy Neely. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet) (jla) |
| NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT. Case assigned to Judge Davidson and Magistrate Judge Percy. (jla) |
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 Mississippi Northern 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.
