Clingaman v. Certegy Payment Recovery Services, Inc.
Plaintiff: Tony Clingaman
Defendant: Certegy Payment Recovery Services, Inc.
Case Number: 4:2010cv02483
Filed: July 12, 2010
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Texas
Office: Houston Office
County: Houston
Presiding Judge: Nancy F. Atlas
Nature of Suit: Consumer Credit
Cause of Action: 15 U.S.C. ยง 1692
Jury Demanded By: Both

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
May 26, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 24 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER GRANTED 21 MOTION for Summary Judgment.(Signed by Judge Nancy F. Atlas) Parties notified.(sashabranner, )
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 Texas Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Clingaman v. Certegy Payment Recovery 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: Tony Clingaman
Represented By: Michael S Agruss
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: Certegy Payment Recovery Services, Inc.
Represented By: Kandy Elaine Johnson Messenger
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?