Mobile Modular Management Corporation v. Modular Technologies, Inc. et al

Defendant: Modular Technologies, Inc. and Terry Lee Andrews
Plaintiff: Mobile Modular Management Corporation
Case Number: 4:2013cv00125
Filed: May 17, 2013
Court: North Carolina Eastern District Court
Office: Eastern Division Office
County: LENOIR
Presiding Judge: Terrence W. Boyle
Nature of Suit: Contract: Other
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
Jury Demanded By: Both

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 North Carolina Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Mobile Modular Management Corporation v. Modular Technologies, Inc. et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Modular Technologies, Inc.
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 ]
Defendant: Terry Lee Andrews
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: Mobile Modular Management Corporation
Represented By: Mark R. Sigmon
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.