BUCKLEY v. NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION
| MICHAEL BUCKLEY |
| NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION and NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION d/b/a AMTRAK |
| 2:2021cv02178 |
| May 13, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania |
| GENE EK PRATTER |
| Labor Litigations |
| 49 U.S.C. ยง 20109 |
| Defendant |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on June 14, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 4 Amtrak's ANSWER to Complaint with Affirmative Defenses by NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION. (Attachments: #1 Certificate of Service)(STRAUSKULAGE, MATTHEW) |
| Filing 3 NOTICE of Appearance by MATTHEW P. STRAUSKULAGE on behalf of NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION (STRAUSKULAGE, MATTHEW) |
| Filing 2 SUMMONS Returned Executed by MICHAEL BUCKLEY re: Rodnita Smith served Summons and Complaint upon NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION by Personal. NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION served on 5/25/2021, answer due 6/15/2021. (ROSENTHAL, SAMUEL) |
| Summons Issued as to NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION. E-MAILED To: COUNSEL on 5/14/21 (bw, ) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION ( Filing fee $ 402 receipt number 0313-15119039.), filed by MICHAEL BUCKLEY. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Designation Form)(ROSENTHAL, SAMUEL) |
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 Pennsylvania Eastern 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.
