INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE v. MURPHY
| WILLIAM CHARLES MURPHY |
| INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE |
| 2:2016cv00008 |
| January 7, 2016 |
| U.S. District Court for the District of Maine |
| Portland Office |
| Androscoggin |
| D. BROCK HORNBY |
| Appeal |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 0158 |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
19
DECISION AND ORDER ON BANKRUPTCY APPEAL re 1 Bankruptcy Appeal - By JUDGE D. BROCK HORNBY. (mnw)
|
|
Filing
17
PROCEDURAL ORDER REGARDING ISSUES TO ADDRESS AT ORAL ARGUMENT - By JUDGE D. BROCK HORNBY. (mnw)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Maine 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: INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE v. MURPHY | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Appellee: WILLIAM CHARLES MURPHY | |
| Represented By: | JOHN H. BRANSON |
| 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 | [ Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Appellant: INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE | |
| Represented By: | PETER SKLAREW |
| 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 | [ 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.
