TD Bank, N.A., as successor to Commerce Bank, N.A. v. Feldman Lubert Adler Harrisburg, LP, a Pennsylvania limited partnership
Plaintiff: TD Bank, N.A., as successor to Commerce Bank, N.A.
Defendant: Feldman Lubert Adler Harrisburg, LP, a Pennsylvania limited partnership
Case Number: 3:2008cv02255
Filed: December 18, 2008
Court: US District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania
Office: Negotiable Instrument Office
County: Dauphin
Presiding Judge: William J. Nealon
Nature of Suit: None
Cause of Action: Diversity
Jury Demanded By: 28:1332 Diversity-Negotiable Instrument
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 Pennsylvania Middle District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: TD Bank, N.A., as successor to Commerce Bank, N.A. v. Feldman Lubert Adler Harrisburg, LP, a Pennsylvania limited partnership
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: TD Bank, N.A., as successor to Commerce Bank, N.A.
Represented By: Barry E. Bressler
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: Feldman Lubert Adler Harrisburg, LP, a Pennsylvania limited partnership
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?