Whipple et al v. RHA Health Services, LLC
| Patricia Whipple and Courtney Aderhold |
| RHA Health Services, LLC |
| 1:2023cv00179 |
| July 17, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Western District of North Carolina |
| W Carleton Metcalf |
| Martin Reidinger |
| Labor: Fair Standards |
| 29 U.S.C. ยง 201 Fair Labor Standards Act |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on August 24, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 5 WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed by Patricia Whipple, Courtney Aderhold. RHA Health Services, LLC waiver sent on 8/23/2023, answer due 10/23/2023. (Slabosky, Ethan) |
| Filing 4 AMENDED COMPLAINT against RHA Health Services, LLC, filed by Patricia Whipple, Courtney Aderhold.(Stanton, Corey) |
| Filing 3 NOTICE of Filing Amended Complaint by Courtney Aderhold, Patricia Whipple (Stanton, Corey) |
| Filing 2 Summons Issued Electronically as to RHA Health Services, LLC. NOTICE: Counsel shall print the summons and serve with other case opening documents in accordance with Fed.R.Civ.P.4 . (ejb) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against RHA Health Services, LLC ( Filing fee $ 402 receipt number ANCWDC-6146139), filed by Patricia Whipple, Courtney Aderhold.(Stanton, Corey) |
| Case assigned to Chief Judge Martin Reidinger and US Magistrate Judge W. Carleton Metcalf. Notice: You must click this link to retrieve the #Case Assignment Packet. This is your only notice - you will not receive a separate document. (ejb) |
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
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.
