National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania v. Edumsa et al

Defendant: Kimberly D Edumsa and Shawn L.C. Tabayoyong
Plaintiff: National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Case Number: 1:2014cv00008
Filed: June 12, 2014
Court: Guam District Court
Office: Hagatna Office
County: Guam
Presiding Judge: Frances M. Tydingco-Gatewood
Referring Judge: Joaquin V.E. Manibusan
Nature of Suit: Insurance
Cause of Action: 28:2201
Jury Demanded By: None

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 Guam District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania v. Edumsa et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Kimberly D Edumsa
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Shawn L.C. Tabayoyong
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Represented By: Randall Todd W. Thompson
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 [ 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.