McNeely v. Loeschner et al
| David McNeely |
| Peter Loeschner, Christopher F. Crawforth, Kevin L. Dach, Municipal Corp. CITY OF SPARKS, Chris Crawforth and City of Sparks |
| 3:2023cv00587 |
| November 20, 2023 |
| US District Court for the District of Nevada |
| Carla Baldwin |
| Larry R Hicks |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act |
| Both |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on March 18, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 6 ACCEPTANCE OF SERVICE by All Defendants on 12/5/2023 executed by David McNeely. All Defendants. (Chattah, Sigal) |
| Filing 5 SUMMONS ISSUED as to All Defendants. (Attachments: #1 Summons - Loeschner, #2 Summons - Dach, #3 Summons - City of Sparks) (DLS) |
| Filing 4 PROPOSED SUMMONS to be issued by Plaintiff David McNeely. (Attachments: #1 Summons, #2 Summons, #3 Summons)(Chattah, Sigal) |
| Case randomly assigned to Judge Larry R. Hicks and Magistrate Judge Carla Baldwin. (DRM) |
| Filing 3 CERTIFICATE of Interested Parties by David McNeely. There are no known interested parties other than those participating in the case. (Chattah, Sigal) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET to #1 Amended Complaint by Plaintiff David McNeely. (Chattah, Sigal) |
| Filing 1 AMENDED COMPLAINT with Jury Demand against Christopher F. Crawforth by David McNeely. No changes to parties. (Chattah, Sigal) Modified on 11/21/2023 (WJ). |
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 Nevada 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.