Kanany v. Union Bank, N.A.
Plaintiff: Robert Kanany
Defendant: Union Bank NA
Case Number: 3:2011cv06062
Filed: December 28, 2011
Court: US District Court for the Western District of Washington
Office: Tacoma Office
County: Clallam
Presiding Judge: Robert J. Bryan
Nature of Suit: Negotiable Instrument
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1330
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
October 24, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 43 ORDER ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR FURTHER DISCOVERY, granting 21 Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed by Judge Robert J. Bryan.(JL)
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 Washington Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Kanany v. Union Bank, N.A.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Robert Kanany
Represented By: Charles M. Greenberg
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: Union Bank NA
Represented By: Matthew Turetsky
Represented By: Claire L. Been
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?