AGI Logistics, Inc. et al v. Approximately 148 Containers of Cargo

Plaintiff: AGI Logistics, Inc. and AGI Logistics USA LLC
Defendant: Approximately 148 Containers of Cargo
Case Number: 2:2008cv00646
Filed: July 2, 2008
Court: Ohio Southern District Court
Office: Contract: Marine Office
County: FRANKLIN
Referring Judge: Mark R. Abel
Presiding Judge: Michael H. Watson
Nature of Suit: None
Cause of Action: Federal Question
Jury Demanded By: 28:1333 Admiralty

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 Ohio Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: AGI Logistics, Inc. et al v. Approximately 148 Containers of Cargo
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: AGI Logistics, Inc.
Represented By: Richard T Robol
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: AGI Logistics USA LLC
Represented By: Richard T Robol
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: Approximately 148 Containers of Cargo
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.