CHELTENHAM TOWNSHIP v. Boucher & James Inc. et al
| CHELTENHAM TOWNSHIP |
| Boucher & James Inc., Ross Boucher, DAVID R. JONES, Mark Eisold and Judith Stern Goldstein |
| 2:2021cv04596 |
| October 20, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania |
| KAREN S MARSTON |
| Other Statutes: Racketeer/Corrupt Organization |
| 18 U.S.C. ยง 1962 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 9, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 6
ORDER THAT PLAITIFF'S MOTION TO REMAND IS GRANTED AND THIS MATTER IS REMANDED TO THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS FOR MONTGOMERY COUNTY. SIGNED BY HONORABLE KAREN S. MARSTON ON 11/9/21.11/10/21 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED.(mbh, )
|
| Filing 5 NOTICE of Appearance by John F Mccaul on behalf of CHELTENHAM TOWNSHIP (Mccaul, John) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE of Appearance by Mark Cedrone on behalf of Mark Eisold with Certificate of Service(Cedrone, Mark) |
| Filing 3 NOTICE of Appearance by THOMAS F. BURKE on behalf of Ross Boucher (BURKE, THOMAS) |
| Filing 2 MOTION to Remand filed by Judith Stern Goldstein.Memorandum, Certificate of Service.(NOFER, FRANK) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL by Boucher & James Inc. (Filing fee $ 402 receipt number APAEDC-15488992), filed by Boucher & James Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Designation Form, #2 Civil Cover Sheet)(BONNER, KIMBERLY) |
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.
