Grismore v. RJM Acquisitions LLC

Plaintiff: Kathy Grismore
Defendant: RJM Acquisitions LLC
Case Number: 2:2008cv00529
Filed: March 18, 2008
Court: Arizona District Court
Office: Consumer Credit Office
County: Maricopa
Presiding Judge: David K Duncan
Referring Judge:
Nature of Suit: Plaintiff
Cause of Action: Federal Question
Jury Demanded By: 15:1681 Fair Credit Reporting Act

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed#Document Text
March 26, 2009 68 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER denying Plaintiff's 24 Motion for Summary Judgment; granting Defendant's 57 Motion for Summary Judgment; denying Plaintiff's 60 Motion for Sanctions; denying Plaintiff's 65 Motion to Strike; the Clerk shall enter judgment in favor of Defendant. Signed by Magistrate Judge David K Duncan on 3/25/09.(REW, )

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

Search for this case: Grismore v. RJM Acquisitions LLC
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Kathy Grismore
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: RJM Acquisitions LLC
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.


Why Is My Information Online?