Davis v. NetSpend Corporation
Thomas Lee Davis |
NetSpend Corporation |
3:2014cv00535 |
September 30, 2014 |
US District Court for the Western District of North Carolina |
Charlotte Office |
Alexander |
David Keesler |
Max O. Cogburn |
Other Contract |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 |
Plaintiff |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 18 ORDER granting 16 Agreed Motion For Special Admission. Ms. Hutcheson is specifically admitted for the limited purpose of filing the parties' Agreed Motion to Dismiss With Prejudice and seeking dismissal of this action. Copy of. Signed by Magistrate Judge David Keesler on 10/30/2015. Order mailed to Shannon H. Hutcheson (Pro se litigant served by US Mail.)(chh) |
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Search for this case: Davis v. NetSpend Corporation | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Plaintiff: Thomas Lee Davis | |
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: NetSpend Corporation | |
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.