Gilbert v. Moneygram Payment System, Inc
Plaintiff: Ryan M. Gilbert
Defendant: Moneygram Payment System, Inc
Case Number: 3:2009cv01640
Filed: April 14, 2009
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of California
Office: Contract: Other Office
County: Santa Clara
Presiding Judge: Samuel Conti
Nature of Suit: None
Cause of Action: Diversity
Jury Demanded By: 28:1441 Petition for Removal- Contract Dispute

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
April 28, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 9 STIPULATION AND ORDER DISMISSING CASE WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Signed by Judge Samuel Conti on 4/28/09. (tdm, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/28/2009)
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 Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Gilbert v. Moneygram Payment System, Inc
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Ryan M. Gilbert
Represented By: Kathryn Quetel
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 ]
Defendant: Moneygram Payment System, Inc
Represented By: Michelle B. Heverly
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?