Hyde v. Hutto
Hyde v. Hutto is a federal personal property / fraud lawsuit filed on 01/05/1994 in the District Court, M.D. Alabama. The case was terminated on 09/29/1994.
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, M.D. Alabama (M.D. Ala.)
Official Court Website → - Assigned judge
- Ira De Ment · 2,122 cases in index
- Docket number
- 2:94-cv-00013
- Nature of suit
- 371 Truth in lending
Claims under the Truth in Lending Act over consumer-credit disclosures. - Jurisdiction
- Federal question
- Date filed
- 01/05/1994
- Date terminated
- 09/29/1994
1,092 Personal Property / Fraud cases in this court are indexed here.
About Personal Property / Fraud Lawsuits
These cases involve damage to or loss of personal property, or claims of fraud and misrepresentation — including truth-in-lending and other deception-based claims.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is Hyde v. Hutto?
Hyde v. Hutto is a federal personal property / fraud lawsuit filed on 01/05/1994 in the District Court, M.D. Alabama. The case was terminated on 09/29/1994. These cases involve damage to or loss of personal property, or claims of fraud and misrepresentation — including truth-in-lending and other deception-based claims.
What type of case is this?
It is classified as “Personal Property / Fraud” under the federal nature-of-suit system. These cases involve damage to or loss of personal property, or claims of fraud and misrepresentation — including truth-in-lending and other deception-based claims.
What court is the case in?
The case is in the District Court, M.D. Alabama, docket number 2:94-cv-00013.
When was the case filed?
Hyde v. Hutto was filed on 01/05/1994. It was terminated on 09/29/1994.
Other Cases Involving These Parties
Related Personal Property / Fraud Cases
Source: public U.S. federal court record — docket 9884697 in the CourtListener/RECAP archive (verify this docket), court docket number 2:94-cv-00013 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).