Mahar v. GC Services, LP
Plaintiff: Rebecca Mahar
Defendant: GC Services, LP
Case Number: 1:2014cv00582
Filed: June 20, 2014
Court: US District Court for the Western District of Texas
Office: Austin Office
Presiding Judge: Lee Yeakel
Nature of Suit: Consumer Credit
Cause of Action: 15 U.S.C. ยง 1692 Fair Debt Collection Act
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
April 13, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 11 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 7 Motion for Attorney Fees, filed by Rebecca Mahar. The undersigned therefore RECOMMENDS that PlaintiffRebecca Mahars Motion for Attorneys Fees and Costs (Dkt. N0. 7) be GRANTED. Signed by Judge Andrew W. Austin. (dm)
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 Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Mahar v. GC Services, LP
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: GC Services, LP
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: Rebecca Mahar
Represented By: Amy Lynn Bennecoff
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?