Quesinberry v. Messerschmidt
| Tony R. Quesinberry |
| Charles Wade Messerschmidt |
| 1:2010cv00769 |
| May 26, 2010 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia |
| Bluefield Office |
| Kanawha |
| Other |
| 77 U.S.C. ยง 7777 |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
32
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER granting defendant's 4 MOTION to Quash service of process; denying plaintiff's 8 MOTION to Stay; denying defendant's 20 MOTION for Hearing on the Motion to Quash. Signed by Judge David A. Faber on 9/1/2010. (cc: attys; any unrepresented party) (mjp)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
| Search for this case: Quesinberry v. Messerschmidt | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Tony R. Quesinberry | |
| 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: Charles Wade Messerschmidt | |
| 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.
