GAGE v. LYNCH et al
| THOMAS I. GAGE |
| KEITH J. LYNCH and BOROUGH OF NEW PROVIDENCE |
| 2:2020cv16236 |
| November 12, 2020 |
| US District Court for the District of New Jersey |
| Madeline Cox Arleo |
| Michael A Hammer |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on January 6, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Clerk's ENTRY OF DEFAULT as to Keith J. Lynch and the Borough of New Providence for failure to plead or otherwise defend. (lag, ) |
| Filing 4 Request for Default by THOMAS I. GAGE against KEITH J. LYNCH and BOROUGH OF NEW PROVIDENCE.(Received on 1/6/2021) (Attachments: #1 Envelope)(lag, ) |
| Filing 3 SUMMONS Returned Executed by THOMAS I. GAGE. as to BOROUGH OF NEW PROVIDENCE served on 11/20/2020, answer due 12/11/2020; KEITH J. LYNCH served on 11/20/2020, answer due 12/11/2020. (lag, ) |
| Filing 2 SUMMONS ISSUED as to BOROUGH OF NEW PROVIDENCE, KEITH J. LYNCH. Attached is the official court Summons, please fill out Defendant and Plaintiffs attorney information and serve. (dam) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against BOROUGH OF NEW PROVIDENCE, KEITH J. LYNCH ( Filing and Admin fee $ 400 receipt number TRE115446) with JURY DEMAND, filed by THOMAS I. GAGE. (Attachments: #1 Exhibits, #2 Civil Cover Sheet, #3 Cover Letter, #4 Proposed Summons, #5 Envelope)(dam) |
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 New Jersey 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.
