Davis v. Chase Bank
Plaintiff: Carolyn Davis
Defendant: Chase Bank
Case Number: 1:2017cv04206
Filed: October 23, 2017
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of Georgia
Office: Atlanta Office
County: Clayton
Presiding Judge: William S. Duffey
Nature of Suit: Other Fraud
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
January 9, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 7 OPINION AND ORDER granting Defendant Chase Bank's Motion to Dismiss 6 and denying as moot Defendant's Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to Plaintiffs Complaint 5 and dismissing this action without prejudice. Signed by Judge William S. Duffey, Jr on 1/9/18. (ddm)
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 Georgia Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Davis v. Chase Bank
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Carolyn Davis
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: Chase Bank
Represented By: Brian F. Hansen
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?