v. NYU GROSSMAN SCHOOL OF MEDICINE RETIREMENT PLAN FOR MEMBERS OF THE FACULTY, PROFESSIONAL RESEARCH STAFF AND ADMINISTRATION et al
| TEACHERS INSURANCE AND ANNUITY ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA (TIAA), NEW YORK UNIVERSITY AS PLAN ADMINISTRATOR OF SAID PLAN, JOHN DOES 1-10 (FICTITIOUS AND UNKNOWN TO PLAINTIFFS AT THIS TIME), INDIVIDUALLY OR AS CORPORATE ENTITIES, RICHARD A. SIEGEL, NYU GROSSMAN SCHOOL OF MEDICINE RETIREMENT PLAN FOR MEMBERS OF THE FACULTY, PROFESSIONAL RESEARCH STAFF AND ADMINISTRATION and SCHIFF HARDEIN LLP |
| BETH BERANBAUM and MICHAEL BERANBAUM |
| 2:2021cv09087 |
| April 13, 2021 |
| US District Court for the District of New Jersey |
| Other Statutory Actions |
| 29 U.S.C. ยง 1132 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on April 13, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against JOHN DOES 1-10 (FICTITIOUS AND UNKNOWN TO PLAINTIFFS AT THIS TIME), INDIVIDUALLY OR AS CORPORATE ENTITIES, NEW YORK UNIVERSITY AS PLAN ADMINISTRATOR OF SAID PLAN, NYU GROSSMAN SCHOOL OF MEDICINE RETIREMENT PLAN FOR MEMBERS OF THE FACULTY, PROFESSIONAL RESEARCH STAFF AND ADMINISTRATION, SCHIFF HARDEIN LLP, RICHARD A. SIEGEL, TEACHERS INSURANCE AND ANNUITY ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA (TIAA) ( Filing and Admin fee $ 402 receipt number ANJDC-12365956) with JURY DEMAND, filed by BETH BERANBAUM, MICHAEL BERANBAUM.(COHEN, LAWRENCE) |
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.
