Harvin v. MidFirst Bank
Harvin v. MidFirst Bank is a federal other civil lawsuit filed on 01/20/2015 in the District Court, D. Arizona. The case was terminated on 05/12/2015.
A lawsuit records allegations and procedural activity. Being named as a party does not establish liability, wrongdoing, or the merits of any claim.
- Court
- District Court, D. Arizona (D. Ariz.)
Official Court Website → - Assigned judge
- Douglas L Rayes · 968 cases in index
- Docket number
- 2:15-cv-00096
- Nature of suit
- 290 Other real property actions
Real-property disputes not covered by a more specific category. - Jurisdiction
- Diversity of citizenship
- Date filed
- 01/20/2015
- Date terminated
- 05/12/2015
695 Other Civil cases in this court are indexed here.
Parties
- plaintiff · Harvin · 51 cases
- defendant · Midfirst Bank · 243 cases
Other Cases Naming This Defendant
Midfirst Bank is named in 243 federal civil cases in this index. Recent Other Civil cases naming the same defendant:
About Other Civil Lawsuits
These are federal civil cases that do not fall under a more specific nature-of-suit category.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is Harvin v. MidFirst Bank?
Harvin v. MidFirst Bank is a federal other civil lawsuit filed on 01/20/2015 in the District Court, D. Arizona. The case was terminated on 05/12/2015. These are federal civil cases that do not fall under a more specific nature-of-suit category.
What type of case is this?
It is classified as “Other Civil” under the federal nature-of-suit system. These are federal civil cases that do not fall under a more specific nature-of-suit category.
What court is the case in?
The case is in the District Court, D. Arizona, docket number 2:15-cv-00096.
When was the case filed?
Harvin v. MidFirst Bank was filed on 01/20/2015. It was terminated on 05/12/2015.
Other Cases Involving These Parties
Related Other Civil Cases
Source: public U.S. federal court record — docket 57182790 in the CourtListener/RECAP archive (verify this docket), court docket number 2:15-cv-00096 on PACER. Court, party, date and judge fields are reproduced from that record; case-type categories, statute decoding and all aggregate figures are derived by Docket Nexus (methodology).