Midwest Motor Supply Co. v. Nietsch
| Midwest Motor Supply Co. and Midwest Motor Supply Co. doing business as Kimball Midwest |
| Rich Nietsch, MRO Systems, Joe Carroll, Chad Davis, Daniel Hayes, Rick Kirkpatrick, Cliff Sachs, Bill Hoeftmann, Pamela Schrader and Robert Sapio |
| 2:2022cv04049 |
| November 16, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Ohio |
| Chelsey M Vascura |
| Michael H Watson |
| Contract: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on December 14, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 2
AMENDED COMPLAINT against Rich Nietsch, MRO Systems, Joe Carroll, Chad Davis, Daniel Hayes, Rick Kirkpatrick, Cliff Sachs, Bill Hoeftmann, Pamela Schrader, Robert Sapio, filed by Midwest Motor Supply Co.. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A-Nietsch Employment Agmt, #2 Exhibit B-Carroll Employment Agmt, #3 Exhibit C-Davis Employment Agmt, #4 Exhibit D-Hayes Employment Agmt, #5 Exhibit E-Hoeftmann Employment Agmt, #6 Exhibit F-Kirkpatrick Employment Agmt, #7 Exhibit G-Sachs Employment Agmt, #8 Exhibit H-Schrader Employment Agmt) (Burch, Christopher)
|
|
Filing 1
COMPLAINT against Rich Nietsch ( Filing fee $ 402 paid - receipt number: AOHSDC-9143898), filed by Midwest Motor Supply Co.. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Civil Cover Sheet) (Burch, Christopher)
|
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 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.
