Hill et al v. Target Corporation
Plaintiff: Kenneth Hill
Defendant: Target Corporation
Case Number: 6:2013cv00041
Filed: January 23, 2013
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of Oklahoma
Office: Muskogee Office
County: Haskell
Presiding Judge: Frank H. Seay
Nature of Suit: Commerce ICC Rates, Etc.
Cause of Action: 47 U.S.C. ยง 0227 Restrictions on use of telephone equipment
Jury Demanded By: Both

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
May 9, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 28 ORDER by Judge Frank H. Seay granting 27 Motion to Dismiss without prejudice. (case terminated) 27 MOTION to Dismiss Without Prejudice ) (trl, Chambers)
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 Oklahoma Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Hill et al v. Target Corporation
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Target Corporation
Represented By: Scott A. Law
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 ]
Plaintiff: Kenneth Hill
Represented By: Betty Outhier Williams
Represented By: Betty Outhier Williams
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?