Sturgill v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co.
Matthew Sturgill |
Norfolk Southern Railway Co. |
2:2018cv00566 |
October 24, 2018 |
US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia |
Lawrence R Leonard |
Rebecca Beach Smith |
Civil Rights: Americans with Disabilities - Employment |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 |
Plaintiff |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on August 7, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 13 NOTICE by Norfolk Southern Railway Co. re #7 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim - Local Rule 7(E) Notice (Kushner, David) |
Filing 12 REPLY to Response to Motion re #7 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim filed by Norfolk Southern Railway Co.. (Kushner, David) |
Filing 11 WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed by Matthew Sturgill. Norfolk Southern Railway Co. waiver sent on 11/19/2018. (bpet, ) |
Filing 10 Memorandum in Opposition re #7 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim filed by Matthew Sturgill. (Thompson, Nicholas) |
Filing 9 Financial Interest Disclosure Statement (Local Rule 7.1) by Norfolk Southern Railway Co.. (Kushner, David) |
Filing 8 Brief in Support to #7 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim filed by Norfolk Southern Railway Co.. (Kushner, David) |
Filing 7 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim by Norfolk Southern Railway Co.. (Kushner, David) |
Filing 6 AMENDED COMPLAINT against Norfolk Southern Railway Co., filed by Matthew Sturgill.(Thompson, Nicholas) |
Filing 5 AMENDED COMPLAINT against Norfolk Southern Railway Co., filed by Matthew Sturgill.(Thompson, Nicholas) |
Notice of Correction re #5 Amended Complaint: the filing user's login does not match the signature on the document. The filing user had been advised to refile the document with the filing user's signature block, or the attorney whose signature block appears on the document must refile the document. (bpet, ) |
Filing 4 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Matthew Sturgill. Norfolk Southern Railway Co. served on 10/29/2018. (jrin) |
Filing 3 Summons Issued as to Norfolk Southern Railway Co. NOTICE TO ATTORNEY: Print out two electronically issued summons and one copy of the attachments for each defendant to be served with the complaint. (Attachments: #1 Procedure for Civil Motions)(jrin) |
Filing 2 Proposed Summons re #1 Complaint by Matthew Sturgill. (Stone, Jonathan) |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Norfolk Southern Railway Co. ( Filing fee $ 400, receipt number 0422-6332780.), filed by Matthew Sturgill. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(epri, ) |
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
Search for this case: Sturgill v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co. | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Defendant: Norfolk Southern Railway Co. | |
Represented By: | David Aaron Kushner |
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: Matthew Sturgill | |
Represented By: | Jonathan Lewis Stone |
Represented By: | Nicholas Delton Thompson |
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.