Kline v. Primis Bank
| Robert Kline |
| Primis Bank |
| 3:2023cv00574 |
| September 8, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia |
| David J Novak |
| Other Statutory Actions |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Tort/Non-Motor Vehicle |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 25, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 11 REPLY to Response to Motion re #5 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim filed by Primis Bank. (Phippen, David) |
| Filing 10 RESPONSE in Opposition re #5 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim filed by Robert Kline. (Floyd, Lee) |
Filing 9
ORDER granting #8 Motion for Pro hac vice Appointed Allen Sattler for Primis Bank. Signed by District Judge David J. Novak on 10/17/2023. (adun, )
|
| Filing 8 Motion to appear Pro Hac Vice by Allen Sattler and Certification of Local Counsel David Phippen Filing fee $ 75, receipt number AVAEDC-9172802. by Primis Bank. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - Application)(Phippen, David) |
| Filing 7 Memorandum in Support re #5 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim filed by Primis Bank. (Phippen, David) |
| Filing 6 Financial Interest Disclosure Statement (Local Rule 7.1) by Primis Bank. (Phippen, David) |
| Filing 5 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim by Primis Bank. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order)(Phippen, David) |
| Filing 4 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Robert Kline Primis Bank served on 9/14/2023, answer due 10/5/2023 (Floyd, Lee) |
| Filing 3 Summons Issued as to Primis Bank. NOTICE TO ATTORNEY Please remove the headers and print two duplex 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. Electronically file the summons return using the filing events Summons Returned Executed or Summons Returned Unexecuted. Please ensure that the original summons page signed by the clerk is the first document to appear when filing the return of service. (adun, ) |
| Initial Case Assignment to District Judge David J. Novak. (adun, ) |
| Filing 2 Proposed Summons by Robert Kline. (Floyd, Lee) |
| Filing 1 Complaint ( Filing fee $ 402, receipt number AVAEDC-9115959.), filed by Robert Kline. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Floyd, Lee) |
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: Kline v. Primis Bank | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Robert Kline | |
| Represented By: | Lee Adair Floyd |
| Represented By: | Sarah Gallo Sauble |
| 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: Primis Bank | |
| Represented By: | David Parker Phippen |
| Represented By: | Allen Sattler |
| 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.
