In Re: PILLSBURY WINTHROP SHAW PITTMAN LLP
Appellant: PILLSBURY WINTHROP SHAW PITTMAN LLP
Appellee: CAPITOL HILL GROUP
Case Number: 1:2011cv00051
Filed: January 10, 2011
Court: US District Court for the District of Columbia
Office: Washington, DC Office
County: 11001
Presiding Judge: Royce C. Lamberth
Nature of Suit: Appeal
Cause of Action: 11:8001
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
April 19, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 13 MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER. Signed by Chief Judge Royce C. Lamberth on April 19, 2011. (lcrcl5)
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: In Re: PILLSBURY WINTHROP SHAW PITTMAN LLP
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Appellant: PILLSBURY WINTHROP SHAW PITTMAN LLP
Represented By: Patrick J. Potter
Represented By: Frederick A. Brodie
Represented By: Dania Slim
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 ]
Appellee: CAPITOL HILL GROUP
Represented By: Mary Kim
Represented By: Daniel Mark Litt
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?