Shelby County, Alabama v. Norfolk Southern Railway Company, Inc et al

Plaintiff: Shelby County, Alabama
Defendant: Norfolk Southern Railway Company, Inc and Donald Armstrong
Case Number: 2:2007cv01658
Filed: September 12, 2007
Court: Alabama Northern District Court
Office: Southern Office
County: Shelby
Presiding Judge: William M Acker
Nature of Suit: Condemnation
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal
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 Alabama Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Shelby County, Alabama v. Norfolk Southern Railway Company, Inc et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Shelby County, Alabama
Represented By: Philip G Piggott
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: Norfolk Southern Railway Company, Inc
Represented By: Crawford S McGivaren, 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: Donald Armstrong
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 should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.