Murphy v. Bank of America
Plaintiff: Morgan Murphy
Defendant: Bank of America
Case Number: 2:2012cv02520
Filed: July 23, 2012
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of Alabama
Office: Southern Office
County: Jefferson
Presiding Judge: Virginia Emerson Hopkins
Nature of Suit: Negotiable Instrument
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1983
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
November 28, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 18 MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge Virginia Emerson Hopkins on 11/28/2012. (JLC)
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: Murphy v. Bank of America
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Morgan Murphy
Represented By: Mark L Rowe
Represented By: Gregory Cade
Represented By: Romaine S Scott, III
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: Bank of America
Represented By: Keith S Anderson
Represented By: Robert R Maddox
Represented By: Michael R Pennington
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?