Anderson v. Prosperity Jockey Lot Inc
| Robert F Anderson |
| Prosperity Jockey Lot Inc |
| 8:2020cv03565 |
| October 9, 2020 |
| US District Court for the District of South Carolina |
| Timothy M Cain |
| Other Statutory Actions |
| 11 U.S.C. ยง 544 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 21, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 9 ***DOCUMENTS E-MAILED: filed 7 Order, with #1 Complaint, 2 Civil Cover Sheet, #3 Local Rule 26.01 Answers to Interrogatories, #6 Summons Returned Executed, to bankruptcy court clerk's office: appeals@scb.uscourts.gov. (kmca) |
| Filing 7 TEXT ORDER. It is apparent from the Complaint that this action falls squarely within the jurisdiction of the Bankruptcy Court. Although no party in that case has raised this issue, the Court notes that the referral of such cases is to be "automatic" pursuant to Local Civ. Rule 83.IX.01 (D.S.C.). See also In re Legacy Dev. SC Grp., LLC, No. 4:16-CV-00300-RBH, 2016 WL 7324678, at *5 (D.S.C. Dec. 16, 2016). This policy is further stated on the District of South Carolina website at https://www.scd.uscourts.gov/Filing/bankruptcy.asp. Therefore, the Clerk is hereby directed to REFER this case along with all filings therein to the Bankruptcy Court. Should any matters in this case fall outside the jurisdiction of the Bankruptcy Court to enter a final judgment, the Bankruptcy Court shall issue proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law to be reviewed de novo by this Court in accordance with Stern v. Marshall, 564 U.S. 462 (2011), and Exec. Benefits Ins. Agency v. Arkison, 134 S. Ct. 2165 (2014), and their progeny. The Bankruptcy Court has the authority to conduct jury trials pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 157(e) and Local Civil Rule 83.IX.03. As this matter in its entirety has been referred to the Bankruptcy Court, the Clerk is directed to terminate this civil case. Entered at the direction of the Honorable Timothy M Cain on 10/21/20. (kmca) |
| Filing 6 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Robert F Anderson. Prosperity Jockey Lot Inc served on 10/14/2020, answer due 11/4/2020. (Attachments: #1 Affidavit)(Poston, Brandon) |
| Filing 4 Summons Issued as to Prosperity Jockey Lot Inc. (abuc) |
| Filing 3 Local Rule 26.01 Answers to Interrogatories by Robert F Anderson.(abuc) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Prosperity Jockey Lot Inc (Filing fee $ 400 receipt number 0420-9398595.), filed by Robert F Anderson. Service due by 1/7/2021(abuc) |
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
| Search for this case: Anderson v. Prosperity Jockey Lot Inc | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant: Prosperity Jockey Lot Inc | |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Robert F Anderson | |
| Represented By: | Brandon Keith Poston |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
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.
