Bahringer v. ADT Security Services Inc
Plaintiff: Thomas A Bahringer
Defendant: ADT Security Services Inc
Case Number: 2:2012cv01473
Filed: June 4, 2012
Court: US District Court for the District of South Carolina
Office: Charleston Office
County: Charleston
Presiding Judge: David C Norton
Nature of Suit: Personal Injury- Product Liability
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1446
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
April 29, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 52 ORDER granting in part and denying in part 43 Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed by Honorable David C Norton on 04/29/2013. (gcle, 4/29/13)
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 South Carolina District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Bahringer v. ADT Security Services Inc
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Thomas A Bahringer
Represented By: Geoffrey H Waggoner
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: ADT Security Services Inc
Represented By: Robert Watson Foster, Jr
Represented By: Erin Richardson Stuckey
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?