Seikaly v. Black Shopping Channel, Inc.
Plaintiff: William R Seikaly
Defendant: Black Shopping Channel, Inc.
Case Number: 2:2017cv12167
Filed: July 3, 2017
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan
Office: Flint Office
County: Oakland
Presiding Judge: Stephanie Dawkins Davis
Presiding Judge: Linda V. Parker
Nature of Suit: Recovery of Overpayment and Enforcement of Judgment
Cause of Action: 12:1725
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
April 30, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 27 OPINION and ORDER Denying Plaintiff's 22 Motion to Amend Judgment. Signed by District Judge Linda V. Parker. (RLou)
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 Michigan Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Seikaly v. Black Shopping Channel, Inc.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: William R Seikaly
Represented By: William R. Seikaly
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 ]
Defendant: Black Shopping Channel, Inc.
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?