Volk v. ACE American Insurance Company

Plaintiff: Linda Volk
Defendant: ACE American Insurance Company
Case Number: 0:2012cv01065
Filed: April 30, 2012
Court: Minnesota District Court
Office: DMN Office
County: Sherburne
Presiding Judge: David S. Doty
Referring Judge: Janie S. Mayeron
Nature of Suit: Insurance
Cause of Action: 28:1332
Jury Demanded By: Defendant

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed#Document Text
February 5, 2013 42 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER denying 14 plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment; granting 27 defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (Written Opinion). Signed by Senior Judge David S. Doty on 2/5/2013. (PJM)

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 this case: Volk v. ACE American Insurance Company
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Linda Volk
Represented By: Richard W Curott
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: ACE American Insurance Company
Represented By: Thomas M Jones
Represented By: Megan-NA K. Kirk
Represented By: Steven J Sheridan
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.