SINGH v. THE BOROUGH OF SAYREVILLE ZONING AND CODE ENFORCEMENT et al
| HARINDER SINGH |
| JOSEPH J. KUBSCH, JR., THE BOROUGH OF SAYREVILLE TAX ASSESSOR'S OFFICE, THE BOROUGH OF SAYREVILLE ZONING AND CODE ENFORCEMENT and RAFAEL ALBARRAN |
| 3:2018cv11831 |
| July 16, 2018 |
| US District Court for the District of New Jersey |
| Trenton Office |
| Middlesex |
| Tonianne J Bongiovanni |
| Michael A Shipp |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on August 8, 2018. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 4
LETTER ORDER denying #2 Motion for Pro Bono Counsel without prejudice as premature. Signed by Magistrate Judge Tonianne J. Bongiovanni on 8/8/2018. (mps)
|
| Filing 3 Pro se Consent & Registration Form to Receive Documents Electronically. [Clerk's Note: Email address added.) (sms) |
| Set Deadlines as to #2 MOTION to Appoint Pro Bono. Motion set for 8/20/2018 before Magistrate Judge Tonianne J. Bongiovanni. Unless otherwise directed by the Court, this motion will be decided on the papers and no appearances are required. Note that this is an automatically generated message from the Clerk`s Office and does not supersede any previous or subsequent orders from the Court. (jem) |
| Filing 2 MOTION to Appoint Pro Bono Counsel by HARINDER SINGH. (jem) |
| Filing 1 Complaint Received. (Attachments: #1 Application IFP, #2 Text of Proposed Order, #3 Exhibit, #4 Civil Cover Sheet)(jem) |
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.
