Woodbridge Glass Co., Inc. v. Caddell Construction Co., Inc. et al
| Woodbridge Glass Co., Inc. |
| Caddell Construction Co., Inc., Travelers Casualty & Surety Company of America and Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland |
| 1:2015cv01052 |
| August 19, 2015 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia |
| Alexandria Office |
| Prince William |
| Michael S (MJ)Nachmanoff |
| Anthony J Trenga |
| Miller Act |
| 40 U.S.C. ยง 3131 Miller Act |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 4, 2015. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 5
So Ordered re #4 Notice of Voluntary Dismissal filed by Woodbridge Glass Co., Inc.. Signed by District Judge Anthony J Trenga on 11/04/2015. (dvanm, )
|
| Filing 4 NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal with Prejudice by Woodbridge Glass Co., Inc. (Schrader, Paul) |
| Filing 3 Summons Issued as to Caddell Construction Co., Inc., Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland, Travelers Casualty & Surety Company of America. For service by process server. (rban, ) |
| Filing 2 Financial Interest Disclosure Statement (Local Rule 7.1) by Woodbridge Glass Co., Inc.. (rban, ) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Caddell Construction Co., Inc., Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland, Travelers Casualty & Surety Company of America ( Filing fee $ 400, receipt number 14683053548.), filed by Woodbridge Glass Co., Inc. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Letter, #3 Receipt)(rban, ) |
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 Virginia 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.
