Morgan Stanley Smith Barney LLC v. Stuart

Petitioner: Morgan Stanley Smith Barney LLC
Respondent: Mark E Stuart
Case Number: 2:2011cv01183
Filed: June 15, 2011
Court: Arizona District Court
Office: Phoenix Division Office
County: Maricopa
Presiding Judge: David G Campbell
Nature of Suit: Other Contract
Cause of Action: 28:1441
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed#Document Text
June 17, 2011 9 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER - Petitioner's emergency motion for remand (Doc. 5) is granted. The Clerk is directed to remand this matter to state court. Signed by Judge David G Campbell on 6/17/2011.(KMG)

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: Morgan Stanley Smith Barney LLC v. Stuart
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Morgan Stanley Smith Barney LLC
Represented By: Milton Alan Wagner
Represented By: Jesse B Simpson
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 ]
Respondent: Mark E Stuart
Represented By: Lorena Elizabeth Chavez
Represented By: Thomas Robert Nolasco
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?