Hancock Fabrics, Inc. v. Rowdec, LLC
| Hancock Fabrics, Inc. |
| Rowdec, LLC |
| 1:2012cv00131 |
| June 4, 2012 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi |
| Eastern Division Office |
| Lee |
| Sharion Aycock |
| David A. Sanders |
| Other Contract |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
90
ORDER granting 82 Motion to Stay with conditions. Signed by District Judge Sharion Aycock on 10/21/2015. (psk)
|
|
Filing
80
MEMORANDUM OPINION re 79 Order on Motion to Stay, Order on Motion to Expedite, Order on Motion for Miscellaneous Relief. Signed by District Judge Sharion Aycock on 8/27/2015. (psk)
|
|
Filing
69
ORDER denying 45 Motion to Enforce Judgment; denying 45 Motion for Independent Audit; denying 45 Motion for Contempt; denying 45 Motion for Hearing. Signed by District Judge Sharion Aycock on 9/23/2014. (psk)
|
|
Filing
44
MEMORANDUM OPINION re ( 62 in 1:12-cv-00222-SA-DAS, 43 in 1:12-cv-00131-SA-DAS) FINAL JUDGMENT. Signed by District Judge Sharion Aycock on 11/19/2013. Associated Cases: 1:12-cv-00131-SA-DAS, 1:12-cv-00222-SA-DAS (psk)
|
|
Filing
29
MEMORANDUM OPINION re (49 in 1:12-cv-00222-SA-DAS) Order on Motion to Dismiss/Lack of Jurisdiction. Signed by District Judge Sharion Aycock on 3/7/2013. Associated Cases: 1:12-cv-00131-SA-DAS, 1:12-cv-00222-SA-DAS (psk)
|
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 Mississippi Northern 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
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.
