United States of America v. Various Stones
Plaintiff: United States of America
Defendant: Various Stones
Case Number: 1:2014cv00091
Filed: May 16, 2014
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi
Office: Aberdeen Division Office
County: Lee
Presiding Judge: Sharion Aycock
Presiding Judge: David A. Sanders
Nature of Suit: Other
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1345
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
December 11, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 2 STIPULATED CONSENT JUDGMENT and Order of Forfeiture; dismissing cause with prejudice. CASE CLOSED. Signed by District Judge Sharion Aycock on 12/11/14. (jlm)
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 Mississippi Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: United States of America v. Various Stones
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: United States of America
Represented By: Samuel David Wright
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: Various Stones
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?