Williams v. Office of the United States Trustee, et al
| Hosea M Williams and Hosea M. Williams |
| Peter J. Barrett, LeClair Ryan, P.C., Office of the United States Trustee, LeClair Ryan Firm and Benjamin C. Ackerly |
| 3:2024cv00025 |
| January 10, 2024 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia |
| M Hannah Lauck |
| Other Statutory Actions |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 Notice of Removal |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 19, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 9
Memorandum in Support re: #8 MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim Amended Complaint (ECF No. #6 ) with Roseboro, filed by Peter J. Barrett (Irvin, John). Modified on 3/6/2024. (sbea)
|
|
Filing 8
MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim Amended Complaint (ECF No. #6 ) with Roseboro, by Peter J. Barrett. (Attachment: #1 Proposed Order)(Irvin, John). Modified on 3/6/2024. (sbea)
|
|
Filing 7
Bill of Particulars by Hosea M. Williams (adun, )
|
|
Filing 6
AMENDED COMPLAINT filed by Hosea M. Williams. (Attachments: #1 Attachments, #2 Local Rule 83.1)(adun, )
|
|
Filing 5
ORDER - It is ORDERED that, no later than February 20, 2024, Mr. Williams SHALL file a Second Amended Complaint which outlines in simple and straightforward terms why Mr. Williams thinks he is entitled to relief and why the Court has jurisdiction over his case. Mr. Williams is ADVISED that the failure to strictly comply with the Court's directives and with applicable rules will result in DISMISSAL OF THIS ACTION WITHOUT PREJUDICE for failure to prosecute. Mr. Barrett's response in state court, (ECF No. 1-3), is DEEMED MOOT. Upon receipt of Mr. Williams's Second Amended Complaint, Defendants SHALL file their answer or responsive motion in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Local Rules for the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. SEE ORDER FOR DETAILS. Signed by District Judge M. Hannah Lauck on 1/23/2024. Copy of order mailed to Mr. Williams as directed. (jpow, )
|
|
Filing 4
This matter comes before the Court sua sponte. Rule 7(E) of the Local Civil Rules for the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia shall not apply to this action. Any party desiring a hearing on a dispositive motion shall file a motion requesting a hearing when the motion is filed. The Court will determine whether a hearing is necessary. Signed by District Judge M. Hannah Lauck on 1/17/2024. Copy of Order mailed to Plaintiff. (adun, )
|
|
Filing 3
NOTICE of Submission of Additional Circuit Court Records Documents by Peter J. Barrett re: #1 Notice of Removal, (Attachments: #1 Exhibit F - Request for Service, #2 Exhibit G - Plaintiff's Bill of Particulars)(Irvin, John). Modified on 1/19/2024. (sbea)
|
|
Filing 2
NOTICE of Appearance by Jennifer McLain McLemore on behalf of Peter J. Barrett (McLemore, Jennifer)
|
|
Initial Case Assignment to District Judge M. Hannah Lauck. (jsmi, )
|
|
Filing 1
Notice of Removal ( Filing fee $ 405, receipt number AVAEDC-9303446.), filed by Peter J. Barrett. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - Plaintiff's Affidavit, #2 Exhibit B - Plaintiff's Amended Complaint, #3 Exhibit C - Demurrer and Bill of Particulars, #4 Exhibit D - Suggestion in Bankruptcy, #5 Exhibit E - Notice of Removal to State Court, #6 Civil Cover Sheet)(Irvin, John)
|
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.
