Davis v. Logan

Defendant: Tiffany Logan
Plaintiff: Margaret Anissa Penn Davis
Case Number: 5:2011cv00097
Filed: March 9, 2011
Court: Kentucky Eastern District Court
Office: Lexington Office
County: Scott
Presiding Judge: Jennifer B Coffman
Nature of Suit: Other Fraud
Cause of Action: 28:1332
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed#Document Text
August 31, 2011 8 Opinion or Order of the Court MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER: It is ORDERED that the 4 MOTION to Dismiss is DENIED. It is FURTHER ORDERED that the Dft shall file an answer to the 1 Complaint NLT 20 days after the date of entry of this Order. Signed by Judge Jennifer B Coffman on August 31, 2011. (AWD) cc: COR

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 Kentucky Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Davis v. Logan
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Tiffany Logan
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 ]
Plaintiff: Margaret Anissa Penn Davis
Represented By: Ellen Christine Moore
Represented By: William K. Moore
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.