Hindes v. Montgomery Lynch & Associates, Inc.

Defendant: Montgomery Lynch & Associates, Inc.
Plaintiff: Anja Hindes
Case Number: 2:2013cv00354
Filed: April 15, 2013
Court: Ohio Southern District Court
Office: Columbus Office
County: FAIRFIELD
Presiding Judge: Gregory L Frost
Referring Judge: Norah McCann King
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 15:1692 Fair Debt Collection Act
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed#Document Text
December 17, 2013 18 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER ADOPTING the REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 14 in that this action is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Signed by Judge Gregory L Frost on 12/17/13. (sem1)

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: Hindes v. Montgomery Lynch & Associates, Inc.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Montgomery Lynch & Associates, 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 ]
Plaintiff: Anja Hindes
Represented By: J Daniel Scharville
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.