E*Trade Securities, et al v. Deutsche Bank, AG, et al
| E*Trade Securities |
| Deutsche Bank, AG |
| 0:2002cv03711 |
| February 21, 2006 |
| US District Court for the District of Minnesota |
| Unassigned |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on April 25, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 849
ORDER granting 844 Motion to Reopen Case. (Written Opinion). Signed by Judge Richard H. Kyle on 02/21/06. (rhks) Modified on 2/22/2006 (LPH).
|
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 Minnesota 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: E*Trade Securities, et al v. Deutsche Bank, AG, et al | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant: Deutsche Bank, AG | |
| 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 ] |
| Plaintiff: E*Trade Securities | |
| 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.
