von der Schmidt et al v. Higgins et al
| Edward M. von der Schmidt and Keanna Ngo |
| Tom Higgins and Silverstein Properties doing business as River Place Management |
| 1:2024cv03462 |
| May 3, 2024 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights Act |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on May 3, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 6 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed..(rdz) |
| Filing 5 STATEMENT OF RELATEDNESS re: that this action be filed as related to 23-cv-3919 (PKC). Document filed by Edward M. von der Schmidt..(rdz) |
| Filing 4 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed..(rdz) |
| Filing 3 REQUEST FOR ISSUANCE OF SUMMONS as to Tom Higgins, re: #1 Complaint. Document filed by Edward M. von der Schmidt..(rdz) |
Filing 2
STANDING ORDER IN RE CASES FILED BY PRO SE PLAINTIFFS (See 24-MISC-127 Standing Order filed March 18, 2024). To ensure that all cases heard in the Southern District of New York are handled promptly and efficiently, all parties must keep the court apprised of any new contact information. It is a party's obligation to provide an address for service; service of court orders cannot be accomplished if a party does not update the court when a change of address occurs. Accordingly, all self-represented litigants are hereby ORDERED to inform the court of each change in their address or electronic contact information. Parties may #consent to electronic service to receive notifications of court filings by email, rather than relying on regular mail delivery. Parties may also ask the court for #permission to file documents electronically. Forms, including instructions for consenting to electronic service and requesting permission to file documents electronically, may be found by clicking on the hyperlinks in this order, or by accessing the forms on the courts website, nysd.uscourts.gov/forms. The procedures that follow apply only to cases filed by pro se plaintiffs. If the court receives notice from the United States Postal Service that an order has been returned to the court, or otherwise receives information that the address of record for a self-represented plaintiff is no longer valid, the court may issue an Order to Show Cause why the case should not be dismissed without prejudice for failure to comply with this order. Such order will be sent to the plaintiffs last known address and will also be viewable on the court's electronic docket. A notice directing the parties' attention to this order shall be docketed (and mailed to any self-represented party that has appeared and has not consented to electronic service) upon the opening of each case or miscellaneous matter that is classified as pro se in the court's records. (Signed by Judge Laura Taylor Swain on 3/18/24) (rdz) (Main Document 2 replaced on 5/7/2024) (rdz).
|
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Tom Higgins, Silverstein Properties. Document filed by Edward M. von der Schmidt, Keanna Ngo..(rdz) |
| Case Designated ECF. (rdz) |
| CASE MANAGEMENT NOTE: For each electronic filing made in a case involving a self-represented party who has not consented to electronic service, the filing party must serve the document on such self-represented party in a manner permitted by Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(b)(2) (other than through the ECF system) and file proof of service for each document so served. Please see #Rule 9.2 of the courts ECF Rules & Instructions for further information..(rdz) |
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.
