Murray v. Central United Life Insurance Company
Plaintiff: Betty Murray
Defendant: Central United Life Insurance Company
Case Number: 5:2008cv00238
Filed: July 10, 2008
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi
Office: Insurance Office
County: Adams
Presiding Judge: David C. Bramlette
Presiding Judge: John M. Roper
Nature of Suit: Plaintiff
Cause of Action: Diversity
Jury Demanded By: 28:1446 Notice of Removal

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
February 24, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 27 AGREED ORDER DISMISSING CASE with prejudice. Signed by Honorable David C. Bramlette, III on 2/24/10 (PKM)
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: Murray v. Central United Life Insurance Company
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Betty Murray
Represented By: James Randal Wallace, Jr.
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: Central United Life Insurance Company
Represented By: James Wilbourn Vise
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?