BENEFICIAL MUTUAL SAVINGS BANK v. PATEL et al
Plaintiff: BENEFICIAL MUTUAL SAVINGS BANK
Defendant: HARSHAD T. PATEL and USHA H. PATEL
Case Number: 2:2009cv06172
Filed: December 29, 2009
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
Office: Philadelphia Office
County: Philadelphia
Presiding Judge: ANITA B. BRODY
Nature of Suit: Negotiable Instrument
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Negotiable Instrument
Jury Demanded By: None
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: BENEFICIAL MUTUAL SAVINGS BANK v. PATEL et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: BENEFICIAL MUTUAL SAVINGS BANK
Represented By: WILLIAM J. LEVANT
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: HARSHAD T. PATEL
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: USHA H. PATEL
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?