Sullivan v. Norfolk Human Services Social Service Division
| Charles F. Sullivan |
| Norfolk Human Services Social Service Division |
| 2:2020cv00492 |
| September 28, 2020 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia |
| Mark S Davis |
| Lawrence R Leonard |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1981 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 20, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 7 NOTICE of Appearance by Adam Daniel Melita on behalf of Norfolk Human Services Social Service Division (Melita, Adam) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE of Appearance by Kristopher Richard McClellan on behalf of Norfolk Human Services Social Service Division (McClellan, Kristopher) |
| Filing 5 WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed by Norfolk Human Services Social Service Division. Norfolk Human Services Social Service Division waiver sent on 11/2/2020, answer due 1/4/2021. (McClellan, Kristopher) |
| Filing 4 PLAINTIFF'S EMERGENCY APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER WITH EQUITABLE RELIEF AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY A PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION SHOULD NOT ISSUE by Charles F. Sullivan. (epri, ) Modified on 11/2/2020 (epri, ). |
| Filing 3 COMPLAINT against Norfolk Human Services Social Service Division, filed by Charles F. Sullivan. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Attachments)(epri, ) |
Filing 2
ORDER: Plaintiff's IFP Application, ECF No. 1, is GRANTED, and the Clerk is DIRECTED to file Plaintiff's Complaint and Motion for TRO. Plaintiff's Motion for TRO is DENIED. The Clerk is DIRECTED to prepare a Notice of Lawsuit and Waiver of Service form for Defendant. A copy of the Complaint, the Notice of Lawsuit, two copies of the Waiver of Service form, and this Order are to be sent to Defendant at the address provided by Plaintiff. If Defendant fails to waive service, the Clerk is DIRECTED to (i) issue a summons, (ii) prepare a packet containing a summons, a copy of the Complaint, and this Order, and (iii) deliver the packet to the United States Marshal, who is DIRECTED to serve the packet on Defendant. A copy of this Order was sent to Plaintiff as DIRECTED ON 11.2.20. Signed by Chief District Judge Mark S. Davis and filed on 11/2/2020. (epri, )
|
| Filing 1 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Charles F. Sullivan. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Complaint, #2 Proposed TRO Motion, #3 Civil Cover Sheet, #4 Attachments)(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: Sullivan v. Norfolk Human Services Social Service Division | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Charles F. Sullivan | |
| 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 ] |
| Defendant: Norfolk Human Services Social Service Division | |
| Represented By: | Adam Daniel Melita |
| Represented By: | Kristopher Richard McClellan |
| 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.
