The Pork Company v. Summit Investments Southeast
| The Pork Company |
| Summit Investments Southeast |
| 7:2017cv00098 |
| May 22, 2017 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina |
| Southern Division Office |
| DUPLIN |
| Louise Wood Flanagan |
| All Other Real Property |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
30
ORDER granting 29 Motion to Stay. This action is stayed until June 15, 2018, and that the deadline for Defendant to file a response to the Complaint is reset for ten (10) days following the Court's lift of the stay. Signed by District Judge Louise Wood Flanagan on 3/20/2018. (Collins, S.)
|
|
Filing
28
ORDER granting 27 Motion to Stay for a period of ninety (90) days from the entry of the Court's order and that the deadline for Defendant to file a response to the Complaint is reset for ten (10) days following the Court's lift of the stay. Counsel is reminded to read the order in its entirety for critical deadlines and information. Signed by District Judge Louise Wood Flanagan on 12/21/2017. (Collins, S.)
|
|
Filing
26
ORDER granting 25 Motion to Stay and Toll All Deadlines. This action is stayed for a period of sixty (60) days from the entry of the Courts order, and that the deadline for Defendant to file a response to the Complaint is reset for ten (10) days following the Courts lift of the stay. Counsel is reminded to read the order in its entirety for critical deadlines and information. Signed by District Judge Louise Wood Flanagan on 10/11/2017. (Collins, S.)
|
|
Filing
24
ORDER granting 23 Motion to Stay. The Joint Motion to Stay and Toll All Deadlines is granted and this action is stayed for a period of thirty (30) days from the entry of the Courts order, and that the deadline for Defendant to file a response to the Complaint is reset for ten (10) days following the Courts lift of the stay. Counsel is reminded to read the order in its entirety for critical deadlines and information. Signed by District Judge Louise Wood Flanagan on 9/11/2017. (Collins, S.)
|
|
Filing
21
ORDER regarding 12 Motion to Dismiss, or in the alternative to transfer. Defendants motion is DENIED. An initial order regarding planning and scheduling will follow. Counsel is reminded to read the order in its entirety for critical deadlines and information. Signed by District Judge Louise Wood Flanagan on 8/15/2017. (Collins, S.)
|
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: The Pork Company v. Summit Investments Southeast | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: The Pork Company | |
| Represented By: | J. Nicholas Ellis |
| Represented By: | Chad W. Essick |
| 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 ] |
| Defendant: Summit Investments Southeast | |
| Represented By: | F. Hill Allen, IV |
| Represented By: | Dean T. Howell |
| Represented By: | Douglas E. Kingsbery |
| 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.
