From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Conner v. Mint Museum of Art

United States District Court, W.D. North Carolina, Charlotte Division
Aug 22, 2022
3:22-CV-269-FDW-DCK (W.D.N.C. Aug. 22, 2022)

Opinion

3:22-CV-269-FDW-DCK

08-22-2022

MARY CONNER, Plaintiff, v. MINT MUSEUM OF ART, Defendant.


ORDER

David C. Keesler, United States Magistrate Judge

THIS MATTER IS BEFORE THE COURT on the “Motion For Admission Pro Hac Vice and Affidavit” (Document No. 9) filed by Marla T. Reschly, concerning Carol C. Lumpkin, on August 22, 2022. Carol C. Lumpkin seeks to appear as counsel pro hac vice for Defendant. Upon review and consideration of the motion, which was accompanied by submission of the necessary fee and information, the Court will grant the motion.

IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that in accordance with Local Rule 83.1, the “Motion For Admission Pro Hac Vice and Affidavit” (Document No. 9) is GRANTED. Carol C. Lumpkin is hereby admitted pro hac vice to represent Defendant.

SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Conner v. Mint Museum of Art

United States District Court, W.D. North Carolina, Charlotte Division
Aug 22, 2022
3:22-CV-269-FDW-DCK (W.D.N.C. Aug. 22, 2022)
Case details for

Conner v. Mint Museum of Art

Case Details

Full title:MARY CONNER, Plaintiff, v. MINT MUSEUM OF ART, Defendant.

Court:United States District Court, W.D. North Carolina, Charlotte Division

Date published: Aug 22, 2022

Citations

3:22-CV-269-FDW-DCK (W.D.N.C. Aug. 22, 2022)