AMERICAN CENTER FOR CIVIL JUSTICE v. AMBUSH
Plaintiff: AMERICAN CENTER FOR CIVIL JUSTICE
Defendant: JOSHUA M. AMBUSH
Counter Claimant: JOSHUA M. AMBUSH
Counter Defendant: AMERICAN CENTER FOR CIVIL JUSTICE
Case Number: 1:2009cv00233
Filed: February 6, 2009
Court: US District Court for the District of Columbia
Office: Washington, DC Office
County: 88888
Presiding Judge: Paul L. Friedman
Nature of Suit: None
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2201 Declaratory Judgement
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 18, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 140 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER that, by July 18, 2014, the defendant shall show cause in writing why [#139] defendant's motion to enforce should not be denied for lack of jurisdiction; and the plaintiff's deadline to respond to defendant's motion to enforce is hereby stayed pending further order of the court. Signed by Judge Paul L. Friedman on June 18, 2014. (MA)
July 1, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 113 OPINION that ACCJ's objection to Magistrate Judge Robinson's memorandum opinion and order is denied, her decision affirmed, and ACCJ's motion for a stay or, in the alternative, for a transfer is denied. Unless the parties otherwise ag ree to a different form of mediation, the parties shall either proceed to mediation before a magistrate judge or begin the second phase of discovery. The parties shall file a joint statement regarding how they wish to proceed in this case on or before July 15, 2011. Signed by Judge Paul L. Friedman on July 1, 2011. (MA)
March 21, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 106 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER denying Plaintiff's Motion for Stay, or in the Alternative, for Transfer to the United States District Court for Puerto Rico (Document No. 95/96). Signed by Magistrate Judge Deborah A. Robinson on 03/21/11. (lcdar3)
January 5, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 61 MEMORANDUM OPINION by Magistrate Judge Deborah A. Robinson on 1/5/10 with respect to Plaintiff's Motion to Recuse.(lcdar3)
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 District Of Columbia District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: AMERICAN CENTER FOR CIVIL JUSTICE v. AMBUSH
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Counter claimant: JOSHUA M. AMBUSH
Represented By: James E. Edwards, Jr.
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 ]
Counter defendant: AMERICAN CENTER FOR CIVIL JUSTICE
Represented By: Jack McKay
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: JOSHUA M. AMBUSH
Represented By: James E. Edwards, Jr.
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: AMERICAN CENTER FOR CIVIL JUSTICE
Represented By: Jack McKay
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?