Thomas v. Olson Associates PC et al
| Kendall Thomas |
| Olson Associates PC doing business as Olson Shaner, Randolph Chip Shaner, Jr., Rob Kolkman, Constable Kolkman LLC and NAR Inc |
| 2:2023cv00899 |
| December 13, 2023 |
| US District Court for the District of Utah |
| Cecilia M Romero |
| Consumer Credit |
| 15 U.S.C. ยง 1692 Fair Debt Collection Act |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on December 15, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 3
ORDER TO PROPOSE SCHEDULE - See order for details. Signed by Magistrate Judge Cecilia M. Romero on 12/14/2023. (haa)
|
| Filing 2 COMPLAINT and Jury Demand against All Defendants (Filing fee $ 405, receipt number AUTDC-4906808) filed by Kendall Thomas. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet) (Stephenson, Eric) |
| Filing 1 Case has been indexed and assigned to Magistrate Judge Cecilia M. Romero. Plaintiff Kendall Thomas is directed to E-File the complaint and cover sheet (found under Complaints and Other Initiating Documents) and pay the filing fee of $ 405.00 by the end of the business day.NOTE: The court will not have jurisdiction until the opening document is electronically filed and the filing fee paid in the CM/ECF system. Civil Summons may be issued electronically. Prepare the summons using the courts #PDF version and email it to utdecf_clerk@utd.uscourts.gov for issuance. (haa) |
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 Utah 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.
