Smith & Keene Electric Service, Inc. v. Arch Insurance Group et al
Smith & Keene Electric Service, Inc. |
Arch Insurance Group |
Watermark Environmental, Inc. |
Hartford Fire Insurance Company |
2:2018cv00681 |
December 21, 2018 |
US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia |
Robert J Krask |
Henry C Morgan |
Miller Act |
40 U.S.C. § 3133 |
None |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on February 15, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 15 Summons Issued as to Hartford Fire Insurance Company. NOTICE TO ATTORNEY: Print out two electronically issued summons and one copy of the attachments for each defendant to be served with the complaint/third party complaint. (Attachments: #1 Civil Motions Procedures)(clou) |
Filing 14 Proposed Summons re #13 Answer to Complaint, Third Party Complaint against Hartford Fire Insurance Company by Watermark Environmental, Inc.. (Pocock, Donald) |
Filing 13 THIRD PARTY COMPLAINT against Hartford Fire Insurance Company by Watermark Environmental, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - Subcontract)(Pocock, Donald) |
Rule 16(b) Scheduling Conference reset for 3/7/2019 at 10:00 AM in Norfolk - Clerk's Office Conference Room. (lbax, ) |
Filing 12 RULE 26(f) PRETRIAL ORDER: Rule 16(b) Scheduling Conference set for 2/21/2019 at 12:30 PM in Norfolk - Clerk's Office Conference Room. Signed by Magistrate Judge Robert J. Krask on 2/4/19. (lbax, ) |
Refer for 16(b) (clou) |
Filing 11 Financial Interest Disclosure Statement (Local Rule 7.1) by Arch Insurance Group. (Pocock, Donald) |
Filing 10 Financial Interest Disclosure Statement (Local Rule 7.1) by Watermark Environmental, Inc.. (Pocock, Donald) |
Filing 9 Defendants' ANSWER to Complaint and Defendant Watermark Environmental Inc.'s, COUNTERCLAIM against Smith & Keene Electric Service, Inc. by Watermark Environmental, Inc., Arch Insurance Group. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - Subcontract)(Pocock, Donald) |
Filing 8 NOTICE of Appearance by Donald Richard Pocock on behalf of Arch Insurance Group, Watermark Environmental, Inc. (Pocock, Donald) |
Filing 7 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Smith & Keene Electric Service, Inc. All Defendants (clou ) |
Filing 6 Summons Issued as to All Defendants. NOTICE TO ATTORNEY: Print out two electronically issued summons and one copy of the attachments for each defendant to be served with the complaint. (Summons Arch Insurance Group, Attachments: #1 Summons Watermark Environmental Inc., #2 Civil Motions Procedures)(clou) |
Filing 5 NOTICE by Smith & Keene Electric Service, Inc. re #1 Complaint, Civil Cover Sheet (Gordon, Jesse) |
Filing 4 Financial Interest Disclosure Statement (Local Rule 7.1) by Smith & Keene Electric Service, Inc.. (Gordon, Jesse) |
Filing 3 Proposed Summons re #1 Complaint, by Smith & Keene Electric Service, Inc.. (Gordon, Jesse) |
Filing 2 Proposed Summons re #1 Complaint, by Smith & Keene Electric Service, Inc.. (Gordon, Jesse) |
Filing 1 Complaint ( Filing fee $ 400, receipt number 0422-6419724.), filed by Smith & Keene Electric Service, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Civil Cover Sheet, #4 Corporate Disclosure, #5 Summons, #6 Summons)(Gordon, Jesse) |
Initial Case Assignment to District Judge Henry C. Morgan, Jr and Magistrate Judge Robert J. Krask. (epri, ) |
Notice of Correction: The filing user has been notified to refile the Summonses and Financial Disclosure Statement as separate docket entries and to refile the Civil Cover Sheet in a non-fillable pdf form. (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
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.