Fox v. Vision Service Plan
Plaintiff:
Patricia Fox
Defendant:
Vision Service Plan
Case Number:
2:2016cv02456
Filed:
October 13, 2016
Court:
California Eastern District Court
Office:
Sacramento Office
County:
Sacramento
Referring Judge:
Deborah Barnes
Presiding Judge:
John A. Mendez
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 23, 2017 | 35 |
![]() |
February 24, 2017 | 27 |
![]() |
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: Fox v. Vision Service Plan | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Plaintiff: Patricia Fox | |
Represented By: | Craig Steinberg |
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: Vision Service Plan | |
Represented By: | Adrianne Elizabeth Marshack |
Represented By: | Andrew H. Struve |
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.