McFall v. CMH Homes, Inc.
Plaintiff: Michael McFall
Defendant: CMH Homes, Inc.
Case Number: 1:2007cv00698
Filed: June 14, 2007
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi
Office: Southern Office
County: Harrison
Presiding Judge: Louis Guirola
Presiding Judge: John M. Roper
Nature of Suit: Contract: Other
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
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
November 3, 2008 Opinion or Order Filing 31 ORDER denying Defendant CMH Homes, Inc.'s 26 Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed by District Judge Halil S. Ozerden on 11/3/2008. (EMN)
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 Mississippi Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: McFall v. CMH Homes, Inc.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Michael McFall
Represented By: M. Channing Powell
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: CMH Homes, Inc.
Represented By: Roland F. Samson, III
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?