Susman Godfrey LLP v. H Blanton Brown and Associates et al

Plaintiff: Susman Godfrey LLP
Defendant: H Blanton Brown and Associates and H Blanton Brown
Case Number: 5:2008cv00271
Filed: March 14, 2008
Court: Oklahoma Western District Court
Office: Constitutional - State Statute Office
County: XX US, Outside State
Presiding Judge: David L. Russell
Nature of Suit: None
Cause of Action: Federal Question
Jury Demanded By: Civil Miscellaneous Case

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 Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Susman Godfrey LLP v. H Blanton Brown and Associates et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Susman Godfrey LLP
Represented By: George W Dahnke
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: H Blanton Brown and Associates
Represented By: B Wayne Dabney
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: H Blanton Brown
Represented By: B Wayne Dabney
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.