Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Gilman
Plaintiff: Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
Defendant: Winthrop W. Gilman
Case Number: 3:2015cv00054
Filed: January 30, 2015
Court: US District Court for the Western District of North Carolina
Office: Charlotte Office
County: Henderson
Presiding Judge: Robert J. Conrad
Nature of Suit: Negotiable Instrument
Cause of Action: Diversity-Breach of 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
November 10, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 12 CONSENT JUDGMENT in favor of Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. against Winthrop W. Gilman. Signed by District Judge Robert J. Conrad, Jr on 11/10/15. (ssh)
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 Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Gilman
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
Represented By: Matthew P. Weiner
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: Winthrop W. Gilman
Represented By: W. Perry Fisher, II
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?