Mutual of Omaha Bank v. Mayer
Plaintiff: Mutual of Omaha Bank
Defendant: William Johnson Mayer
Case Number: 4:2015cv01598
Filed: June 8, 2015
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Texas
Office: Houston Office
County: Harris
Presiding Judge: David Hittner
Nature of Suit: Negotiable Instrument
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
July 7, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 42 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER granting 31 MOTION to Dismiss 29 Amended Answer, Counterclaim of Defendant (Signed by Magistrate Judge Stephen Wm Smith) Parties notified.(jmarchand, 4)
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: Mutual of Omaha Bank v. Mayer
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Mutual of Omaha Bank
Represented By: Yasmin Islam Atasi
Represented By: Nicholas Edward Petree
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: William Johnson Mayer
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?