Alexander v. Dollar Tree, Inc. et al
| Myrtle Alexander |
| Dollar Tree, Inc., Administrative Committee of the Dollar Tree Retirement Savings Plan and Does No. 1-10 |
| 2:2022cv00198 |
| May 10, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia |
| Robert J Krask |
| Roderick C Young |
| Labor: E.R.I.S.A. |
| 29 U.S.C. ยง 1132 E.R.I.S.A.-Employee Benefits |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on May 11, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 3 Summons Issued as to Dollar Tree, Inc., NOTICE TO ATTORNEY: Please remove the headers and print two duplexed copies of the electronically issued summons for each Defendant. Please serve one copy of the summons and a copy of the Complaint upon each Defendant. Please ensure that your process server returns the service copy (executed or unexecuted) to your attention and electronically file it using the filing events, Summons Returned Executed or Summons Returned Unexecuted. (Attachments: #1 Civil Motions Procedures)(epri, ) |
| Initial Case Assignment to District Judge Roderick C. Young and Magistrate Judge Robert J. Krask. (epri, ) |
| Filing 2 Proposed Summons by Myrtle Alexander. (Chappell, Glenn) |
| Filing 1 Complaint ( Filing fee $ 402, receipt number AVAEDC-8384383.), filed by Myrtle Alexander. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Chappell, Glenn) |
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.
