Soep Painting Corp. v. Tricore, Inc., et al

Defendant: Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland and Tricore, Inc.
Plaintiff: Soep Painting Corp.
Case Number: 1:2013cv10664
Filed: March 21, 2013
Court: Massachusetts District Court
Office: Boston Office
County: Middlesex
Presiding Judge: F. Dennis Saylor
Nature of Suit: Miller Act
Cause of Action: 28:1352 Miller Act
Jury Demanded By: Both

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

Search for this case: Soep Painting Corp. v. Tricore, Inc., et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland
Represented By: Matthew J. Dunn
Represented By: Edward Kutchin
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: Tricore, Inc.
Represented By: Edward Kutchin
Represented By: Matthew J. Dunn
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: Soep Painting Corp.
Represented By: Marc C. Laredo
Represented By: Trevor M. Findlen
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.