KAMCO INDUSTRIAL SALES, INC. v. LOVEJOY, INC.
Plaintiff: KAMCO INDUSTRIAL SALES, INC.
Defendant: LOVEJOY, INC.
Case Number: 2:2009cv01407
Filed: April 1, 2009
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
Office: Contract: Other Office
County: Chester
Presiding Judge: LOUIS H. POLLAK
Nature of Suit: Plaintiff
Cause of Action: Diversity
Jury Demanded By: 28:1332 Diversity-Other Contract

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
March 10, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 41 ORDER THAT DEFENDANT LOVERJOY'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT IS GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART; ETC.. SIGNED BY HONORABLE LOUIS H. POLLAK ON 3/8/11. 3/11/11 ENTERED AND E-MAILED.(jl, )
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 Pennsylvania Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: KAMCO INDUSTRIAL SALES, INC. v. LOVEJOY, INC.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: KAMCO INDUSTRIAL SALES, INC.
Represented By: MITCHELL A. KRAMER
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: LOVEJOY, 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 [ 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?