Needelman v. Otis Elevator Company, Inc.
Mark Needelman |
Otis Elevator Company and Otis Elevator Company, Inc. |
1:2018cv07157 |
August 8, 2018 |
US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
Foley Square Office |
Suffolk |
George B Daniels |
Labor: Other |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 lr |
Plaintiff |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on March 15, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 7 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Howard Mark Wexler on behalf of Otis Elevator Company, Inc.. (Wexler, Howard) |
Filing 6 INITIAL PRETRIAL CONFERENCE: Initial Conference set for 11/7/2018 at 09:30 AM in Courtroom 11A, 500 Pearl Street, New York, NY 10007 before Judge George B. Daniels, as further set forth in this order. (Signed by Judge George B. Daniels on 8/9/2018) (jwh) |
Filing 5 ELECTRONIC SUMMONS ISSUED as to Otis Elevator Company, Inc.. (jgo) |
Filing 4 COMPLAINT against Otis Elevator Company, Inc.. Document filed by Mark Needelman.(Nardo, Raymond) |
Case Designated ECF. (jgo) |
Magistrate Judge Robert W. Lehrburger is so designated. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 636(c) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 73(b)(1) parties are notified that they may consent to proceed before a United States Magistrate Judge. Parties who wish to consent may access the necessary form at the following link: #http://nysd.uscourts.gov/forms.php. (jgo) |
CASE OPENING INITIAL ASSIGNMENT NOTICE: The above-entitled action is assigned to Judge George B. Daniels. Please download and review the Individual Practices of the assigned District Judge, located at #http://nysd.uscourts.gov/judges/District. Attorneys are responsible for providing courtesy copies to judges where their Individual Practices require such. Please download and review the ECF Rules and Instructions, located at #http://nysd.uscourts.gov/ecf_filing.php. (jgo) |
***NOTICE TO ATTORNEY REGARDING PARTY MODIFICATION. Notice to attorney Raymond Nardo. The party information for the following party/parties has been modified: Otis Elevator Company, Inc.. The information for the party/parties has been modified for the following reason/reasons: party name contained a typographical error;. (jgo) |
***NOTICE TO ATTORNEY REGARDING DEFICIENT PLEADING. Notice to Attorney Raymond Nardo to RE-FILE Document No. #1 Complaint. The filing is deficient for the following reason(s): due to party modification, the wrong party whom the pleading is against was selected;. Re-file the pleading using the event type Complaint found under the event list Complaints and Other Initiating Documents - attach the correct signed PDF - select the individually named filer/filers - select the individually named party/parties the pleading is against. (jgo) |
***NOTICE TO ATTORNEY REGARDING CIVIL CASE OPENING STATISTICAL ERROR CORRECTION: Notice to attorney Raymond Nardo. The following case opening statistical information was erroneously selected/entered: Arbitration code e (Exempt); County code New York;. The following correction(s) have been made to your case entry: the Arbitration code has been deleted; the County code has been modified to Suffolk;. (jgo) |
Filing 3 REQUEST FOR ISSUANCE OF SUMMONS as to Otis Elevator Company, Inc., re: #1 Complaint. Document filed by Mark Needelman. (Nardo, Raymond) |
Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed. (Nardo, Raymond) |
Filing 1 FILING ERROR - DEFICIENT PLEADING - FILED AGAINST PARTY ERROR - COMPLAINT against Otis Elevator Company. (Filing Fee $ 400.00, Receipt Number 0208-15426559)Document filed by Mark Needelman.(Nardo, Raymond) Modified on 8/9/2018 (jgo). |
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 Southern 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.