CitiBank NA v. Hunter

Petitioner: CitiBank NA
Respondent: David Hunter
Case Number: 2:2012cv02452
Filed: November 14, 2012
Court: Arizona District Court
Office: Phoenix Division Office
County: Yuma
Presiding Judge: Bridget S Bade
Nature of Suit: Other Statutes: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 9:9 Motion to Confirm Arbitration Loan
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
July 11, 2013 16 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER GRANTING petitioner's motion for summary disposition (doc. 15 ). IT IS FURTHER ORDERED GRANTING petitioner's Application for Confirmation of Arbitration Award rendered in favor of Citibank (doc. 1 ). The clerk shall enter final judgment. Signed by Senior Judge Frederick J Martone on 7/11/2013.(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: CitiBank NA v. Hunter
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent: David Hunter
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 ]
Petitioner: CitiBank NA
Represented By: Laura Elizabeth Sixkiller
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?