Chadwick v. Carrols Restaurant Group Inc et al
| Damion Chadwick |
| Carrols Restaurant Group Inc, Carrols LLC and Daniel T Accordino |
| 7:2019cv02571 |
| September 11, 2019 |
| US District Court for the District of South Carolina |
| Timothy M Cain |
| Labor: Fair Standards |
| 29 U.S.C. ยง 201 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 25, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 6 WAIVER OF SERVICE by Damion Chadwick. All Defendants served on 9/25/19, answer due 11/25/19. (Attachments: #1 Executed Waiver of Service for Carrols Restaurant Group, Inc., #2 Executed Waiver of Service for Carrols, LLC, #3 Executed Waiver of Service for Daniel Accordino)(Reckenbeil, John) Modified on 9/25/2019: to add text (service and answer dates) (kmca). |
| Filing 4 Summons Issued as to Carrols LLC, Carrols Restaurant Group Inc, Damion Chadwick. (Attachments: #1 Summons Carrols, LLC, #2 Summons Daniel Accordino)(kmca) |
| Filing 3 Local Rule 26.01 Answers to Interrogatories by Damion Chadwick.(kmca) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Daniel T Accordino, Carrols LLC, Carrols Restaurant Group Inc (Filing fee $400 receipt number 0420-8664238), filed by Damion Chadwick. Service due by 12/10/2019. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - Plaintiff's last work week punch detail list, #2 Exhibit B - BK's Kitchen Staff Listing)(kmca) |
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.
