BALLARD v. BRANCH BANKING AND TRUST COMPANY
Plaintiff: DANIEL E. BALLARD
Defendant: BRANCH BANKING AND TRUST COMPANY
Case Number: 1:2011cv01327
Filed: July 21, 2011
Court: US District Court for the District of Columbia
Office: Washington, DC Office
County: 88888
Presiding Judge: Ellen S. Huvelle
Nature of Suit: Truth in Lending
Cause of Action: 15 U.S.C. ยง 1692
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
June 11, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 23 MEMORANDUM OPINION denying plaintiff's 17 Motion for Class Certification. Signed by Judge Ellen S. Huvelle on June 11, 2012. (lcesh2)
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 District Of Columbia District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: BALLARD v. BRANCH BANKING AND TRUST COMPANY
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: DANIEL E. BALLARD
Represented By: Earl N. Mayfield, III
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 ]
Defendant: BRANCH BANKING AND TRUST COMPANY
Represented By: James Philip Head
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.


Why Is My Information Online?