Broadbent et al v. Mohawk Valley Health System et al
| Ethan Broadbent, Harley Holmes and Cherise Nelson |
| Mohawk Valley Health System and St. Elizabeth Health Center |
| 6:2024cv00443 |
| March 28, 2024 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of New York |
| Therese Wiley Dancks |
| Glenn T Suddaby |
| Labor: Fair Standards |
| 29 U.S.C. ยง 206 Collect Unpaid Wages |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 28, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 3 G.O. 25 FILING ORDER ISSUED: Initial Rule 16 Telephone Conference set for 6/26/2024 at 9:30 AM before Magistrate Judge Therese Wiley Dancks. Civil Case Management Plan must be filed and Mandatory Disclosures are to be exchanged by the parties on or before 6/20/2024. (Pursuant to Local Rule 26.2, mandatory disclosures are to be exchanged among the parties but are NOT to be filed with the Court.) (kck) |
| Filing 2 Summons Issued as to Mohawk Valley Health System and St. Elizabeth Health Center. (Attachment: #1 Summons Issued as to St. Elizabeth Health Center) (kck) |
| Filing 1 CLASS AND COLLECTIVE ACTION COMPLAINT with JURY DEMAND against Mohawk Valley Health System and St. Elizabeth Health Center (Filing fee $405 receipt number ANYNDC-6675027) filed by Ethan Broadbent, Harley Holmes and Cherise Nelson. (Attachment: #1 Civil Cover Sheet) (kck) |
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.
