Hardison v. Copeland
Plaintiff:
Rochelle Marie Hardison
Defendant:
Remedios C Copeland
Case Number:
2:2010cv00002
Filed:
December 31, 2009
Court:
California Eastern District Court
Office:
Sacramento Office
County:
Solano
Presiding Judge:
Garland E. Burrell
Referring Judge:
John F. Moulds
Nature of Suit:
Constitutional - State Statute
Cause of Action:
28:1332 Diversity-Declaratory Judgement
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 |
---|---|---|
August 10, 2010 | 21 |
![]() |
April 23, 2010 | 12 |
![]() |
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 California Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Search for this case: Hardison v. Copeland | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Defendant: Remedios C Copeland | |
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: Rochelle Marie Hardison | |
Represented By: | Karl-Fredric Joseph Seligman |
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.