Doe v. Doe
Plaintiff: John Doe
Defendant: Jane Doe
Case Number: 1:2013cv02790
Filed: April 12, 2013
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois
Office: Chicago Office
County: Cook
Presiding Judge: Ronald A. Guzman
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 18 U.S.C. ยง 2518 Interception of Wire/Oral/Electronic Communication
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
June 5, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 11 WRITTEN Opinion entered by the Honorable Ronald A. Guzman on 6/5/2013: For the reasons set forth in this order, the Court denies plaintiff's request to litigate as John Doe. Plaintiff has fourteen days from the date of this Order to file an amended complaint in his own name or dismiss this suit. Mailed notice (cjg, )
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 Illinois Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Doe v. Doe
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Jane Doe
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: John Doe
Represented By: Charles Lee Mudd, Jr
Represented By: Mark Anthony Petrolis
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?