Heller v. Catlin Insurance Co. Uk. Ltd et

Plaintiff: Zev Heller
Defendant: Catlin Insurance Co. Uk. Ltd and ACSI, Inc.
Case Number: 7:2013cv00025
Filed: January 11, 2013
Court: Texas Southern District Court
Office: McAllen Office
County: Hidalgo
Presiding Judge: Randy Crane
Nature of Suit: Insurance
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Notice of Removal
Jury Demanded By: Defendant

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

Search for this case: Heller v. Catlin Insurance Co. Uk. Ltd et
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Zev Heller
Represented By: John Saenz
Represented By: Vicente Gonzalez, Jr.
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: Catlin Insurance Co. Uk. Ltd
Represented By: Rachel Reese
Represented By: Gerard Joseph Kimmitt, II
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: ACSI, Inc.
Represented By: Gerard Joseph Kimmitt, II
Represented By: Rachel Reese
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.