Fletcher v. Yum! Brands, Inc.
Plaintiff: Glen Fletcher
Defendant: Yum! Brands, Inc.
Case Number: 1:2008cv00815
Filed: August 5, 2008
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia
Office: Motor Vehicle Office
County: Prince William
Presiding Judge: Theresa Carroll Buchanan
Presiding Judge: T. S. Ellis
Nature of Suit: Plaintiff
Cause of Action: Diversity
Jury Demanded By: 28:1441 Notice of Removal-Tort/Motor Vehicle (P.I.)

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
May 15, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 148 MEMORANDUM OPINION re 122 Motion for New Trial. Signed by District Judge Anthony J Trenga on 5/15/2009. (rban, )
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 Virginia Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Fletcher v. Yum! Brands, Inc.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Glen Fletcher
Represented By: Douglas Bell Wessel
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: Yum! Brands, Inc.
Represented By: Eugenia Vroustouris
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?