Loomis v. Kennedy, Ehrler and Associates LLC et al

Defendant: Larry Heimer and Kennedy, Ehrler and Associates LLC
Plaintiff: Joseph Charles Loomis
Case Number: 2:2012cv00721
Filed: April 4, 2012
Court: Arizona District Court
Office: Phoenix Division Office
County: Maricopa
Presiding Judge: Frederick J Martone
Nature of Suit: Withdrawal
Cause of Action: 28:0157
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 Arizona District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Loomis v. Kennedy, Ehrler and Associates LLC et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Larry Heimer
Represented By: Edward G Hochuli
Represented By: David Lee Stout
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: Kennedy, Ehrler and Associates LLC
Represented By: Edward G Hochuli
Represented By: David Lee Stout
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 ]
Plaintiff: Joseph Charles Loomis
Represented By: Gerald K Smith
Represented By: Emil W Herich
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.