Clearview Energy, LLC v. Leasure

Petitioner: Clearview Energy, LLC
Respondent: Robert W. Leasure
Case Number: 1:2013cv00007
Filed: January 25, 2013
Court: Kentucky Western District Court
Office: Bowling Green Office
County: Clinton
Presiding Judge: Joseph H. McKinley
Nature of Suit: Bankruptcy Appeal (801)
Cause of Action: 11:101 Bankruptcy
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
January 28, 2013 5 Opinion or Order of the Court OPINION AND ORDER by Chief Judge Joseph H. McKinley, Jr on 1/28/2013. The Court denies Petitioner's motion for emergency relief (DN 1 ). cc: Counsel, USBC, Judge Lloyd (TJD)

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

Search for this case: Clearview Energy, LLC v. Leasure
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Clearview Energy, LLC
Represented By: Stanton L. Cave
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 ]
Respondent: Robert W. Leasure
Represented By: Daniel T. Albers, Jr.
Represented By: Mark A. Robinson
Represented By: Robert T. Wagner
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 should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.