PERNELL v. BROWN
| LEROY PERNELL |
| BRANDY BROWN |
| 1:2024mc00043 |
| April 5, 2024 |
| US District Court for the District of Columbia |
| Loren L AliKhan |
| Other Statutory Actions |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on April 5, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 1 MOTION to Enforce Non-Party Subpoena by LEROY PERNELL. (Attachments: #1 Exhibits)(znmw) |
| Filing fee received: $ 52, receipt number: 207064. (znmw) |
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 Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
| Search for this case: PERNELL v. BROWN | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Petitioner: LEROY PERNELL | |
| Represented By: | Anuja Diwakar Thatte |
| 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 ] |
| Respondent: BRANDY BROWN | |
| 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.
