Randall Patrick v. Citibank, N.A.
| RANDALL PATRICK |
| CITIBANK, N.A. |
| 17-1663 |
| May 25, 2017 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit |
| Other Contract Actions |
Opinions
We have the following opinions for this case:
| Description |
|---|
| Randall Patrick v. Citibank, N.A. |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
406705984
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [1000088195-2]. Originating case number: 1:17-cv-00218-CCE-JLW. Copies to all parties and the district court. [1000165489]. Mailed to: Randall Patrick. [17-1663]
|
Access the Case Summary and Docket Report to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
| Search for this case: Randall Patrick v. Citibank, N.A. | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff - appellant: RANDALL PATRICK | |
| Represented By: | Randall Patrick |
| 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 - appellee: CITIBANK, N.A. | |
| Represented By: | Cassandra Lauren Crawford |
| Represented By: | Donald Richard Pocock |
| 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.
