Dixon et al v. Batson's Harness Shop

Plaintiff: Kelly Dixon and Ronald Dixon, Jr.
Defendant: Batson's Harness Shop
Case Number: 1:2013cv00859
Filed: March 21, 2013
Court: Maryland District Court
Office: Baltimore Office
County: Caroline
Presiding Judge: George Levi Russell
Nature of Suit: Personal Injury- Product Liability
Cause of Action: 28:1332
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

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

Search for this case: Dixon et al v. Batson's Harness Shop
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Kelly Dixon
Represented By: Michael T Wharton(Designation Retained)
Represented By: Michael Sweeney Rubin
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: Ronald Dixon, Jr.
Represented By: Michael T Wharton(Designation Retained)
Represented By: Michael Sweeney Rubin
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: Batson's Harness Shop
Represented By: Charles L Simmons, Jr
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.