UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. CABARRUS PODIATRY ASSOCIATES, P.C. et al

Plaintiff: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant: CABARRUS PODIATRY ASSOCIATES, P.C. and DR. JOHN MICHAEL DIEHL
Case Number: 1:2013cv00189
Filed: March 7, 2013
Court: North Carolina Middle District Court
Office: NCMD Office
County: Cabarrus
Referring Judge: L. PATRICK AULD
Presiding Judge: N. C. TILLEY
Nature of Suit: False Claims Act
Cause of Action: 31:3729 False Claims Act
Jury Demanded By: None

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

Search for this case: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. CABARRUS PODIATRY ASSOCIATES, P.C. et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Represented By: CHERYL T. SLOAN
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: CABARRUS PODIATRY ASSOCIATES, P.C.
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: DR. JOHN MICHAEL DIEHL
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.