Sotak v. Bertoni et al
| Rose A. Sotak |
| John Doe No. 1, John Doe No. 3, Thomas R. Augostini, John Doe No. 4, Robert Mack, Leonard J. Perfetti, Frank Bertoni and John Doe No. 2 |
| 3:2018cv00288 |
| March 7, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of New York |
| Binghamton Office |
| Broome |
| David N Hurd |
| David E Peebles |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 Fed. Question |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 4, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 3 G.O. 25 FILING ORDER ISSUED: Initial Rule 16 Conference set for 5/4/2018 at 12:30 PM in Binghamton before Magistrate Judge David E. Peebles. Civil Case Management Plan must be filed and Mandatory Disclosures are to be exchanged by the parties on or before 4/27/2018. (Pursuant to Local Rule 26.2, mandatory disclosures are to be exchanged among the parties but are NOT to be filed with the Court.) (meb) |
| Filing 2 STATE COURT SUMMONS WITH NOTICE: filed by Thomas R. Augostini, Frank Bertoni, Robert Mack, Leonard J. Perfetti. (meb) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Broome County Supreme Court, case number EFCA2018000360 (Filing fee $400 receipt number ANYNDC-4313554) filed by Frank Bertoni, Thomas R. Augostini, Leonard J. Perfetti, Robert Mack. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Exhibit A - State Court Summons with Notice)(meb) |
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 York 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.
