Keezer et al v. United States of America, The
Duane Robert Keezer and Sharon Keezer |
United States of America, The |
2:2021cv01985 |
July 2, 2021 |
US District Court for the District of South Carolina |
Margaret B Seymour |
Personal Inj. Med. Malpractice |
28 U.S.C. ยง 2671 |
None |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on August 30, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 12 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Sharon Keezer, Duane Robert Keezer. All Defendants. (Attachments: #1 Supporting Documents Summons, #2 Supporting Documents Affidavit of Service)(Lanford, Bradley) |
Filing 11 TEXT ORDER granting #8 Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice: It is ordered that Jeanne Anne Steffin who represents Plaintiff Duane Robert Keezer and Sharon Keezer is granted admission pro hac vice in this case. Entered at the Direction of The Honorable Margaret B Seymour on 7/28/2021.(vdru, ) |
Filing 10 TEXT ORDER granting #7 Motion for Admission Pro Hac Vice : It is ordered that Thomas P. Valet who represents Plaintiff Duane Robert Keezer and Sharon Keezer is granted admission pro hac vice in this case. Entered at the Direction of The Honorable Margaret B Seymour on 7/28/2021.(vdru, ) . |
Filing 9 DELETION OF DOCKET ENTRY NUMBER 5 and 6 Reason: The entries were refiled under under correct log in with corrected documents.Corrected Filing Document Numbers #7 and #8 Modified filing date to that of original filing: 7/26/2021. Response due date modified to that of original filing: 8/9/2021. (vdru, ) |
Filing 8 MOTION to Amend/Correct 6 MOTION to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Jeanne Anne Steffin ( Filing fee $ 350 receipt number 0420-9980308) by Duane Robert Keezer, Sharon Keezer. Response to Motion due by 8/10/2021. Add an additional 3 days only if served by mail or otherwise allowed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 6 or Fed. R. Crim. P. 45. Proposed order is being emailed to chambers with copy to opposing counsel.(Berger, Kenneth) (Main Document 8 replaced on 7/28/2021) (vdru, ). (Additional attachment(s) added on 7/28/2021: #1 Proposed Order) (vdru, ). Modified on 7/28/2021 to replace main document with correct version as provided by the filer and add proposed order as attachment. (vdru, ). Modified on 7/28/2021 to correct filing date and response date. (vdru, ). |
Filing 7 MOTION to Amend/Correct 5 MOTION to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Thomas Valet ( Filing fee $ 350 receipt number 0420-9980277) by Duane Robert Keezer, Sharon Keezer. Response to Motion due by 8/10/2021. Add an additional 3 days only if served by mail or otherwise allowed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 6 or Fed. R. Crim. P. 45. Proposed order is being emailed to chambers with copy to opposing counsel.(Berger, Kenneth) (Main Document 7 replaced on 7/28/2021) (vdru, ). (Additional attachment(s) added on 7/28/2021: #1 Proposed Order) (vdru, ). Modified on 7/28/2021 to replace main document with corrected version as provided by the filer and add proposed order. (vdru, ). Modified on 7/28/2021 to correct filing date and response date. (vdru, ). |
Filing 3 Summons Issued as to United States of America, The. U.S. Attorney and U.S. Attorney General. (vdru, ) |
Filing 2 Local Rule 26.01 Answers to Interrogatories by Duane Robert Keezer, Sharon Keezer.(vdru, ) |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT against United States of America, The ( Filing fee $ 402 receipt number 0420-9939313.), filed by Sharon Keezer, Duane Robert Keezer. Service due by 9/30/2021 (Attachments: #1 Affidavit).(vdru, ) |
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 South Carolina 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.