Chaput v. Griffin
Plaintiff: Joseph Randel Chaput
Defendant: William Avery Griffin
Case Number: 3:2014mc00131
Filed: October 28, 2014
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of Texas
Office: Dallas Office
County: Anderson
Presiding Judge: A. Joe Fish
Presiding Judge: David L Horan
Nature of Suit: Other

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
December 16, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 4 Memorandum Opinion and Order: The Court GRANTS in part and DENIES in part Plaintiff's Motion to Quash Defendant William Avery Griffin's Subpoena and Deposition on Written Questions [Dkt. No. 1]. (See order for specifics) (Ordered by Magistrate Judge David L Horan on 12/16/2014) (mcrd)
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 Texas Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Chaput v. Griffin
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: William Avery Griffin
Represented By: Joshua Lee Weems
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: Joseph Randel Chaput
Represented By: Alan J Robertson
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?