Schmidt et al v. City of Norfolk et al
Plaintiff: Lee Schmidt and Crystal Arrington
Defendant: City of Norfolk and Mark Talbot
Case Number: 2:2024cv00621
Filed: October 21, 2024
Court: U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia
Presiding Judge: Mark S Davis
Referring Judge: Lawrence R Leonard
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Other
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on January 27, 2026. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
December 16, 2024 Opinion or Order Filing 22 RESPONSE in Opposition re #18 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction and Lack of Personal Jurisdiction as to the Norfolk Police Department filed by Crystal Arrington, Lee Schmidt. (Frommer, Robert)
December 13, 2024 Opinion or Order Filing 21 CONSENT ORDER dismissing the Norfolk Police Department without prejudice. Signed by Chief District Judge Mark S. Davis on 12/13/2024. (jhie, )
December 12, 2024 Opinion or Order Filing 20 MOTION to Dismiss Norfolk Police Department Without Prejudice, Subject to Conditions by Crystal Arrington, Lee Schmidt. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order Consent Order)(Frommer, Robert)
November 25, 2024 Opinion or Order Filing 19 Memorandum in Support re #18 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction and Lack of Personal Jurisdiction as to the Norfolk Police Department filed by City of Norfolk, Norfolk Police Department, Mark Talbot. (Soloria, Karla)
November 25, 2024 Opinion or Order Filing 18 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction and Lack of Personal Jurisdiction as to the Norfolk Police Department by City of Norfolk, Norfolk Police Department, Mark Talbot. (Soloria, Karla)
November 14, 2024 Opinion or Order Filing 17 ORDER granting #15 Motion for Extension of Time. Defendants shall file their motion in response to the Complaint by November 25, 2024; Plaintiffs shall file a response by December 16, 2024, and the Defendant's reply brief shall be filed within 6 days of Plaintiffs' response. Signed by Magistrate Judge Lawrence R. Leonard on 11/14/2024. (jhie, )
November 13, 2024 Opinion or Order Filing 16 NOTICE of Appearance by Adam Daniel Melita on behalf of City of Norfolk, Norfolk Police Department, Mark Talbot (Melita, Adam)
November 13, 2024 Opinion or Order Filing 15 Joint MOTION for Extension of Time by City of Norfolk, Norfolk Police Department, Mark Talbot. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order proposed order Joint Motion for Extension of Time)(Soloria, Karla)
November 13, 2024 Opinion or Order MOTION REFERRED to Magistrate Judge: Lawrence R. Leonard. #15 Joint MOTION for Extension of Time (jhie, )
November 4, 2024 Opinion or Order Filing 14 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Lee Schmidt, Crystal Arrington Norfolk Police Department served on 10/28/2024, answer due 11/18/2024 (Frommer, Robert)
November 4, 2024 Opinion or Order Filing 13 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Lee Schmidt, Crystal Arrington Mark Talbot served on 10/28/2024, answer due 11/18/2024 (Frommer, Robert)
November 4, 2024 Opinion or Order Filing 12 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Lee Schmidt, Crystal Arrington City of Norfolk served on 10/28/2024, answer due 11/18/2024 (Frommer, Robert)
October 23, 2024 Opinion or Order Filing 11 ORDER granting #8 Motion for Pro hac vice for Joshua Aaron Windham on behalf of Crystal Arrington and Lee Schmidt. Signed by Chief District Judge Mark S. Davis on 10/23/2024. (alet)
October 23, 2024 Opinion or Order Filing 10 ORDER granting #7 Motion for Pro hac vice for Michael Benjamin Soyfer on behalf of Crystal Arrington and Lee Schmidt. Signed by Chief District Judge Mark S. Davis on 10/23/2024. (alet)
October 21, 2024 Opinion or Order Filing 9 Three (3) Summonses Issued as to City of Norfolk, Norfolk Police Department, Mark Talbot. 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, )
October 21, 2024 Opinion or Order Filing 8 Motion to appear Pro Hac Vice by Joshua A. Windham and Certification of Local Counsel Robert Frommer Filing fee $ 75, receipt number AVAEDC-9803480. by Crystal Arrington, Lee Schmidt. (Frommer, Robert)
October 21, 2024 Opinion or Order Filing 7 Motion to appear Pro Hac Vice by Michael B. Soyfer and Certification of Local Counsel Robert Frommer Filing fee $ 75, receipt number AVAEDC-9803467. by Crystal Arrington, Lee Schmidt. (Frommer, Robert)
October 21, 2024 Opinion or Order Filing 6 Financial Interest Disclosure Statement (Local Rule 7.1) by Crystal Arrington, Lee Schmidt. (Frommer, Robert)
October 21, 2024 Opinion or Order Filing 5 Proposed Summons to Mark Talbot, in his official capacity as the Norfolk Chief of Police by Crystal Arrington, Lee Schmidt (Frommer, Robert)
October 21, 2024 Opinion or Order Filing 4 Proposed Summons to Norfolk Police Department by Crystal Arrington, Lee Schmidt (Frommer, Robert)
October 21, 2024 Opinion or Order Filing 3 Proposed Summons for City of Norfolk by Crystal Arrington, Lee Schmidt (Frommer, Robert)
October 21, 2024 Opinion or Order Filing 2 NOTICE of Appearance by Robert Peller Frommer on behalf of Crystal Arrington, Lee Schmidt (Frommer, Robert)
October 21, 2024 Opinion or Order Filing 1 Complaint ( Filing fee $ 405, receipt number AVAEDC-9803266.), filed by Lee Schmidt, Crystal Arrington. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Frommer, Robert)
October 21, 2024 Opinion or Order Initial Case Assignment to Chief District Judge Mark S. Davis and Magistrate Judge Lawrence R. Leonard. (epri, )

Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. 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 this case: Schmidt et al v. City of Norfolk et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Lee Schmidt
Represented By: Michael Benjamin Soyfer
Represented By: Joshua Aaron Windham
Represented By: Robert Peller Frommer
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 [ Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Crystal Arrington
Represented By: Michael Benjamin Soyfer
Represented By: Joshua Aaron Windham
Represented By: Robert Peller Frommer
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 [ Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: City of Norfolk
Represented By: Adam Daniel Melita
Represented By: Karla Marissa Jamias Soloria
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 [ Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Mark Talbot
Represented By: Adam Daniel Melita
Represented By: Karla Marissa Jamias Soloria
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 [ 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.


Why Is My Information Online?