Einhorn v. Kapitus Servicing Inc et al
| Shmuel Einhorn |
| Kapitus Servicing Inc, Sandora Capital LLC, Albert Malah, Michael Carlson, Benjamin Johnston, Andrew Reiser, Anthony Rose, ABC Corporations 1-5, John or Jane Does 1-10 and John Does 1-5 |
| Big Ben Inc |
| 1:2022cv09616 |
| November 10, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Victor Marrero |
| Contract: Other |
| 18 U.S.C. ยง 1964 Civil Remedies: Racketeering (RICO) Act |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on December 28, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| CASE OPENING INITIAL ASSIGNMENT NOTICE: The above-entitled action is assigned to Judge Victor Marrero. Please download and review the Individual Practices of the assigned District Judge, located at #https://nysd.uscourts.gov/judges/district-judges. 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 #https://nysd.uscourts.gov/rules/ecf-related-instructions..(vf) |
| Magistrate Judge Gabriel W. Gorenstein 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: #https://nysd.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/2018-06/AO-3.pdf. (vf) |
| Case Designated ECF. (vf) |
| ***NOTICE TO ATTORNEY REGARDING CIVIL. CASE OPENING STATISTICAL ERROR CORRECTION: Notice to attorney Scott Craig Levenson. The following case opening statistical information was erroneously selected/entered: Origin code A (Second Reopening). The following correction(s) have been made to your case entry: the Origin code has been modified to 1 (Original Proceeding). (vf) |
| ***NOTICE TO ATTORNEY REGARDING DEFICIENT PLEADING. Notice to Attorney Scott Craig Levenson to RE-FILE Document No. #1 Complaint. The filing is deficient for the following reason(s): the All Defendant radio button 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. (vf) |
| ***NOTICE TO ATTORNEY TO ELECTRONICALLY FILE CIVIL COVER SHEET. Notice to Attorney Scott Craig Levenson. Attorney must electronically file the Civil Cover Sheet. Use the event type Civil Cover Sheet found under the event list Other Documents. (vf) |
| ***NOTICE TO ATTORNEY REGARDING PARTY MODIFICATION. Notice to attorney Scott Craig Levenson. The party information for the following party/parties has been modified: Big Ben Inc, Kapitus Servicing Inc, John and Jane Does 1-10. The information for the party/parties has been modified for the following reason/reasons: party role was entered incorrectly; party text was omitted; party name entered incorrectly. (vf) |
| Filing 1 FILING ERROR - DEFICIENT PLEADING - FILED AGAINST PARTY ERROR - COMPLAINT against All Defendants. (Filing Fee $ 402.00, Receipt Number BNYSDC-26946551)Document filed by Shmuel Einhorn, Big Ben Inc. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1 (Agreement), #2 Exhibit 2 (Req. for Reconciliation), #3 Exhibit 3 (Email Denying Request)).(Levenson, Scott) Modified on 11/14/2022 (vf). |
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.
