Pearson v. Vital Recovery Services, Inc.
Plaintiff: Jane Pearson
Defendant: Vital Recovery Services, Inc.
Case Number: 2:2011cv01595
Filed: June 14, 2011
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of California
Office: Sacramento Office
County: Sacramento
Presiding Judge: Edmund F. Brennan
Presiding Judge: Frank C. Damrell
Nature of Suit: Consumer Credit
Cause of Action: 15 U.S.C. ยง 1692
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
July 15, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 8 ORDER RE SETTLEMENT AND DISPOSITION signed by Judge Frank C. Damrell, Jr on 7/15/2011 ORDERING dispositional documents to be filed on or before September 16, 2011. (Krueger, M)
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 this case: Pearson v. Vital Recovery Services, Inc.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Vital Recovery Services, Inc.
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 [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Jane Pearson
Represented By: Tammy L. Hussin
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 [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | 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?