Marshall v. Nilram et al

Petitioner: Krystal Mae Marshall
Respondent: Robert Nilram, Dawn Nilram and Lewistown Church of Christ
Case Number: 3:2010cv01466
Filed: July 13, 2010
Court: California Southern District Court
Office: San Diego Office
County: Shasta
Referring Judge: Ruben B. Brooks
Presiding Judge: Dana M. Sabraw
Nature of Suit: Mandamus and Other
Cause of Action: 28:2241
Jury Demanded By: None

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 Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Marshall v. Nilram et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Krystal Mae Marshall
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 ]
Respondent: Robert Nilram
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 ]
Respondent: Dawn Nilram
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 ]
Respondent: Lewistown Church of Christ
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?