Your case is unique, but you are not alone.

About 41,000 new cases are filed in U.S. courts every weekday. Behind each one is a person trying to understand what happens next. Here’s what the public record can tell you about this matter — and about the people deciding it.

  • Know your judge

    Every judge has a pattern — what they grant, what they deny, how they handle the kinds of motions your case will see.

  • Know your attorney

    See an attorney’s actual track record — case types, courts, and how they’ve performed in front of this judge before.

  • Know your court

    Every courthouse has its own rhythm — filing-to-resolution times, common dispositions, how often cases like yours settle.

Is this judge more likely to rule for the plaintiff or the defendant in cases of this type?

How has your attorney actually performed in front of this judge?

AICasePredict surfaces patterns from public court records. We don’t predict outcomes and we don’t recommend changing your attorney — that’s a conversation for you and them. We just show you what the record already says.

Full Analytics Report

  • Complete case narrative
  • Judge details and rulings
  • Case disposition and outcome
  • All docket entries
  • Related cases and filings
$20
One-time purchase
Photo of Mercer County

Court

Mercer County

Ohio

View Court Profile

Case Information

Filed 2025-05-16
Status Reopen (RO)
Type Other Tort (efiling)
Docket 21 entries

Parties

Plaintiff Muhlenkamp, Jason A|Muhlenkamp, Shannon A
Defendant Dues, Joseph M|North Star Hardware & Implement Co
Photo of Hon. Fox, Matthew K

Judge

Hon. Fox, Matthew K

Mercer County (OH)

Ohio

View Judge Profile

Lawyers

Docket Entries

  1. ADDT'L CLERK COMPUTER FEE PURSUANT TO 2303.20 ORC FOR JOURNAL PAGES
  2. CIVIL FILING FEE.
  3. COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND E-FILED TOGETHER WITH INSTRUCTIONS FOR SERVICE. (SHAUN PUTMAN ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFFS) COPY ISSUED TO COURT.
  4. UNDERTAKING (FOR DEPOSIT RECEIVED)
  5. ADDT'L CLERK COMPUTER FEE PURSUANT TO 2303.20 ORC FOR UNDERTAKING.
  6. MISC ENTRY (CLERK FEES) E-FILED COPIES
  7. SUMMONS ISSUED BY CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECIEPTS REQUESTED UPON JOSEPH M DUES 8380 E 200 STREET PORTLAND IN 47371 AND NORTH STAR HARDWARE & IMPLEMENT CO ATTN: JERROLD STAMMEN STATUATORY AGENT US STATE ROUTE 127 NORTH STAR OH 45350 TOGETHER WITH TRUE COPIES OF COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND, INSTRUCTIONS FOR SERVICE AND SUMMONS. SUMMONS FILED. RECEIPTS FILED.
  8. ADDT'L CLERK COMPUTER FEE PURSUANT TO 2303.20 ORC FOR 2 SUMMONS
  9. JOINT ANSWER OF DEFENDANT JOSEPH DUES & NORTH STAR HARDWARE & IMPLEMENT COMPANY TO PLAINTIFFS' COMPLAINT E-FILED. (CURRY) COPY ISSUED TO COURT.
  10. NOTICE OF WAIVER OF SERVICE E-FILED. (CURRY) COPY ISSUED TO COURT.
  11. THE FOLLOWING WAS SET FOR: Judge: FOX, MATTHEW K Event: ZOOM CONFERENCE Date: 06/16/2025 Time: 11:00 AM
  12. NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT ZOOM CONFERENCE FILED. (ZOOM CONFERENCE ON MONDAY 6/16/2025 AT 11:00 AM) COURT ISSUED COPIES.
  13. NOTICE OF SERVICE OF DISCOVERY E-FILED. (CURRY) COPY ISSUED TO COURT.
  14. RETURN RECEIPT FOR CERTIFIED MAIL RETURNED AND FILED. SERVICE OBTAINED UPON NORTH STAR HARDWARE & IMPLEMENT CO C/O JERROLD STAMMEN STATUTORY AGENT US STATE ROUTE 127 NORTH STAR OH 45350 ON 5/20/2025. (SARAH SELHORST)
  15. CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED UPON JOSEPH M DUES 8380 E 200 STREET PORTLAND IN 47371 CONTAINING COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND TOGETHER WITH INSTRUCTIONS FOR SERVICE RETURNED AND FILED. (RETURN TO SENDER; UNCLAIMED; UNABLE TO FORWARD)
  16. NOTICE OF FAILURE OF SERVICE UPON JOSEPH M DUES 8380 E 200 STREET PORTLAND IN 47371 ISSUED TO ATTORNEY PUTMAN. COPY FILED.
  17. ADDT'L CLERK COMPUTER FEE PURSUANT TO 2303.20 ORC FOR NOTICE OF FAILURE OF SERVICE.
  18. THE FOLLOWING WAS SET FOR: Judge: FOX, MATTHEW K Event: ZOOM CONFERENCE Date: 12/01/2025 Time: 09:00 AM
  19. JUDGMENT ENTRY ON INITIAL CONFERENCE BY ZOOM FILED. (STATUS REPORT BY ZOOM ON TUESDAY DECEMBER 1, 2025 AT 9:00 AM) COPIES ISSUED 06/18/2025.
  20. ADDT'L CLERK COMPUTER FEE PURSUANT TO 2303.20 ORC FOR 2 JOURNAL PAGES
  21. JUDGMENT ENTRY DESIGNATING CASE AS COMPLEX LITIGATION PURSUANT TO RULE 42(B) OF THE OHIO RULES OF SUPERINTENDENCE FILED. (THE COURT DESIGNATES THIS MATTER AS "COMPLEX LITIGATION" FOR OHIO SUPREME COURT REPORTING PURPOSES) COPIES ISSUED ON 7/9/2025.

See the patterns behind this case

The free view above tells you who’s in the room. The detailed reports below show how the room tends to behave — using the same public records lawyers quietly rely on before every hearing.

  • Judge Report

    How this judge has ruled in cases like yours — case mix, motion outcomes, and historical docket. Judges set the floor of what’s possible in your courtroom.

  • Attorney vs Judge Report

    Everything in the Judge Report, plus how your attorney has actually performed in front of this judge. Attorneys move you off the floor — or don’t.

One-time payment, no subscription. Reports describe past public court activity — they don’t predict outcomes and they aren’t legal advice.

Get Free Case Details

Enter your email to receive case information including parties, docket entries, and status updates.

By submitting you agree to our Privacy Policy.

Need this case removed? Enter your email above — the confirmation email includes a case removal link.

Legal Analytics Has Been Featured In

Featured in Forbes, Bloomberg, The New Yorker, Above The Law, American Bar Association, and more