Gelco Corporation v. Den-Star of Minnesota, LLC
Plaintiff: Gelco Corporation
Defendant: Den-Star of Minnesota, LLC
Case Number: 0:2009cv01228
Filed: May 26, 2009
Court: US District Court for the District of Minnesota
Office: DMN Office
County: XX US, Outside State
Presiding Judge: Boylan
Presiding Judge: Doty
Nature of Suit: Other
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Other Contract
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
May 27, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 6 STIPULATED TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER granting 2 Motion for TRO (Written Opinion). Signed by Senior Judge David S. Doty on 05/27/2009. (PJM)
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 Minnesota District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Gelco Corporation v. Den-Star of Minnesota, LLC
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Gelco Corporation
Represented By: Aaron B Chapin
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: Den-Star of Minnesota, LLC
Represented By: William F Mohrman
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?