Leed HR, LLC v. Redridge Finance Group, LLC

Plaintiff: Leed HR, LLC
Defendant: Redridge Finance Group, LLC
Case Number: 3:2012cv00797
Filed: November 27, 2012
Court: Kentucky Western District Court
Office: Louisville Office
County: Jefferson
Presiding Judge: Thomas B. Russell
Nature of Suit: Securities/Commodities
Cause of Action: 15:78m(a) Securities Exchange Act
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
August 5, 2013 12 Opinion or Order of the Court MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER signed by Senior Judge Thomas B. Russell on 8/3/13. For reasons set forth 6 Motion to Dismiss is DENIED; 9 Motion to Strike is rendered MOOT by this memorandum opinion and order.. cc:counsel (SJS)

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 Kentucky Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Leed HR, LLC v. Redridge Finance Group, LLC
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Leed HR, LLC
Represented By: Judson B. Wagenseller
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: Redridge Finance Group, LLC
Represented By: John David Dyche
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.