Exum v. Berryhill
| Carston Exum |
| Nancy A. Berryhill |
| 5:2019cv00039 |
| February 15, 2019 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina |
| James C Dever |
| Other Statutory Actions |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1442 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 15, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 9
ORDER denying as moot #8 Motion to Deny Extension of Time to Respond. Signed by Peter A. Moore, Jr., Clerk of Court on 3/1/2019. Sent to Carston Exum at 4737-H Courtney Lane Raleigh, NC 27616 via US Mail. (Sellers, N.)
|
| Motion Referred to Peter A. Moore, Jr., Clerk of Court regarding #8 MOTION to Deny Extension of Time to Respond regarding #4 First MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer (to Plaintiff's Complaint). (Sellers, N.) |
| Filing 8 MOTION to Deny Extension of Time to Respond regarding #4 First MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer (to Plaintiff's Complaint) filed by Carston Exum. (Sellers, N.) |
| Filing 7 Financial Disclosure Statement filed by Carston Exum. (Sellers, N.) |
| Filing 6 Notice of Self-Representation filed by Carston Exum. (Attachments: #1 Envelope) (Sellers, N.) |
|
Filing 5
ORDER granting #4 Motion for Extension of Time to Answer. Defendant shall have up to and including April 19, 2019, in which to respond to Plaintiff's Complaint. Signed by Peter A. Moore, Jr., Clerk of Court on 2/19/2019. Sent to Carston Exum at 4737-H Courtney Lane Raleigh, NC 27616 via US Mail. (Sellers, N.)
|
| Filing 4 First MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer (to Plaintiff's Complaint) filed by Nancy A. Berryhill. (Attachments: #1 Text of Proposed Order) (Harris, John) |
| Motion Referred to Peter A. Moore, Jr., Clerk of Court regarding #4 First MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer (to Plaintiff's Complaint). (Sellers, N.) |
| Filing 3 Notice regarding #1 Notice of Removal and requirement to have pro se plaintiff file a notice of self representation and financial disclosure statement mailed via US Mail to Carston Exum at 4737-H Courtney Lane, Raleigh, NC 27616 along with a blank notice of self representation and a blank financial disclosure statement on February 15, 2019. (Rudd, D.) |
| Filing 2 Notice of Appearance filed by John E. Harris on behalf of Nancy A. Berryhill. (Harris, John) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL by Nancy A. Berryhill from Wake County District Court, case number 19 CVD 000607., filed by Nancy A. Berryhill. (Attachments: #1 Summons and Complaint filed in Wake Co. District Court, #2 Civil Cover Sheet, #3 Supplemental Removal Cover Sheet, #4 Letter to Wake Co. District Court Clerk dated February 15, 2019, advising case has been removed to federal courrt) (Harris, John) |
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.
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
| Search for this case: Exum v. Berryhill | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant: Nancy A. Berryhill | |
| Represented By: | John E. Harris |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Carston Exum | |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
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.
