Setliff v. Charter Manufacturing Company, Inc.
| Timothy Setliff |
| Charter Manufacturing Company, Inc. |
| 3:2023cv02255 |
| November 20, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Ohio |
| Jeffrey J Helmick |
| Labor: Fair Standards |
| 29 U.S.C. ยง 201 Fair Labor Standards Act |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on January 17, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 5 Waiver of Service Returned Executed. Charter Manufacturing Company, Inc. waiver sent on 11/28/2023, answer due 1/29/2024 filed on behalf of Timothy Setliff (Bryant, Daniel) Modified on 1/18/2024 to include dates (R,EM). |
| Filing 4 FILING ERROR-Waiver of Service Returned Executed by Timothy Setliff. Charter Manufacturing Company, Inc. waiver sent on 11/28/2023, answer due 1/29/2024 filed on behalf of Timothy Setliff (Bryant, Daniel) Modified on 1/18/2024-Wrong document uploaded. Re-filed as #5 (R,EM). |
| Filing 3 Notice of Filing Consent to Join filed by Timothy Setliff. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - Consent to Join Form)(Bryant, Daniel) |
| Filing 2 Magistrate Consent Form issued. No summons issued none were provided. (K,AR) |
| Random Assignment of Magistrate Judge pursuant to Local Rule 3.1. In the event of a referral, case will be assigned to Magistrate Judge Darrell A. Clay. (K,AR) |
| Notice re Prompt Service. Counsel for Plaintiff is responsible for promptly serving the Complaint on Defendant(s) upon receiving the issued summons from the Clerk and, after service has been perfected, electronically filing a Return of Service or an executed Waiver of Service for each Defendant.Service is to be accomplished pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4, which includes provisions for personal service and waiver of service, and Local Rule 4.2. If you wish the Clerk to serve the Complaint on Defendant(s) (a seldom used alternative because it does not save time or money), you must provide the Clerk's office with copies of the Complaint along with other necessary documents, in the manner set forth in Local Rule 4.2(a). (K,AR) |
| Judge Jeffrey J. Helmick assigned to case. (K,AR) |
| Filing 1 Collective and Class Action Complaint with jury demand against Charter Manufacturing Company, Inc.. Filing fee paid $ 402, Receipt number AOHNDC-12283154.. Filed by Timothy Setliff. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - Consent to be Named Plaintiff, #2 Civil Cover Sheet) (Bryant, Daniel) |
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 Ohio Northern 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
| Search for this case: Setliff v. Charter Manufacturing Company, Inc. | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Timothy Setliff | |
| Represented By: | Daniel I. Bryant |
| Represented By: | Esther E. Bryant |
| Represented By: | Matthew B. Bryant |
| 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: Charter Manufacturing Company, Inc. | |
| 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.
