Lloyd v. Prajna Group, Inc.
Appellant: Robert V. Lloyd
Appellee: Prajna Group, Inc.
Case Number: 3:2009cv00848
Filed: October 20, 2009
Court: US District Court for the Western District of Kentucky
Office: Louisville Office
County: Jefferson
Presiding Judge: Charles R. Simpson
Nature of Suit: None
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1334 Bankruptcy Appeal
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 20, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 7 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER signed by Judge Charles R. Simpson, III on 1/19/2010. For the reasons set forth, Appellee's Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction 4 is DENIED. cc: Counsel (RLK)
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: Lloyd v. Prajna Group, Inc.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Appellant: Robert V. Lloyd
Represented By: Mark D. Chandler
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: Prajna Group, Inc.
Represented By: John R. Wilson
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?