Woodside Priority, LLC v. Garlock
| Woodside Priority, LLC |
| William F. Garlock |
| 3:2015cv02154 |
| May 14, 2015 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of California |
| San Francisco Office |
| San Francisco |
| Richard Seeborg |
| Appeal |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 0158 |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
7
ORDER OF DISMISSAL. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 9/10/15. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/10/2015)
|
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 California Northern 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: Woodside Priority, LLC v. Garlock | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Appellant: Woodside Priority, LLC | |
| Represented By: | Daniel P. Iannitelli |
| Represented By: | Andrea D. McGary |
| 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 ] |
| Appellee: William F. Garlock | |
| Represented By: | Zachary James Tyson |
| 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.
