Wells v. Enterprise Recovery Systems, Inc.

Plaintiff: Liesl Wells
Defendant: Enterprise Recovery Systems, Inc.
Case Number: 1:2013cv01009
Filed: April 17, 2013
Court: Colorado District Court
Office: Denver Office
County: Arapahoe
Presiding Judge: Philip A. Brimmer
Referring Judge: Kathleen M. Tafoya
Nature of Suit: Consumer Credit
Cause of Action: 15:1692 Fair Debt Collection Act
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed#Document Text
May 3, 2013 6 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER Setting Scheduling Conference. Scheduling Conference set for 7/23/2013 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom C201 before Magistrate Judge Kathleen M. Tafoya, by Magistrate Judge Kathleen M. Tafoya on 5/3/13. (sgrim)

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 Colorado District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Wells v. Enterprise Recovery Systems, Inc.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Liesl Wells
Represented By: David Michael Larson
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Enterprise Recovery Systems, Inc.
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 [ 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 were retrieved from PACER, and should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.