Legal Opinion
SWIFT v. PANDEY
District Court, D. New Jersey
Decided November 30, 2023No. 2:13-cv-00650Unknown
1Opinion
NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY ROBERT SWIFT, Civil Action No. 13-650 (BRM) (JSA) Plaintiff, v. RAMESH PANDEY, et al., OPINION & ORDER DENYING Defendants. MOTION TO BE RELIEVED AS COUNSEL Presently before the Court is the motion of Stark & Stark, P.C. (“the Stark Firm”) to be relieved as counsel for Defendants Ramesh Pandey and Bhuwan Pandey (the “Pandey Defendants”) (ECF No. 508). Plaintiff pro se Robert Swift opposes the motion (ECF No. 509). No oral argument was heard pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure78(b). Having considered the parties’…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- United States v. Richard Balter, No. 94-5593. United States of America v. Kenneth Cutler, No. 94-5625. United States of America v. Chris Oscar Dejesus, No. 94-5626Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1996
- United States Ex Rel. Cherry Hill Convalescent Center, Inc. v. Healthcare Rehab Systems, Inc.District Court, D. New Jersey · 1997
- Haines v. Liggett Group, Inc.District Court, D. New Jersey · 1993
- McDaniel v. Daiichi Sankyo, Inc.United States District Court · 2018