Alicia Gentile v. The Dial Corporation

Defendant: The Dial Corporation
Plaintiff: Alicia Gentile
Case Number: 1:2011cv02274
Filed: September 13, 2011
Court: New Hampshire District Court
Office: Concord Office
Presiding Judge: Steven J. McAuliffe
Nature of Suit: Fraud or Truth-In-Lending
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Fraud
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed#Document Text
January 13, 2012 28 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER: Attorney Schmelz shall register for Electronic Case Filing on or before January 27, 2012. (Doc. no. 14 in 1:11-cv-02274-SM.) (Notice of Compliance Deadline set for 1/27/2012.) So Ordered by Judge Steven J. McAuliffe.(jab)

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 New Hampshire District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Alicia Gentile v. The Dial Corporation
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: The Dial Corporation
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 ]
Plaintiff: Alicia Gentile
Represented By: Thomas D. Mauriello
Represented By: Ronie M. Schmelz
Represented By: James C. Shah
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.