FEDERAL INSURANCE COMPANY et al v. CAMPBELL et al
| PACIFIC INDEMNITY CO and FEDERAL INSURANCE COMPANY |
| INDIVIDUAL SURETY GROUP LLC, ERIC CAMPBELL, STEVE STOKELING and FIRST FIDELITY ASURETY COMPANY LLC |
| 3:2013cv00429 |
| July 30, 2013 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Florida |
| Pensacola Office |
| XX US, Outside State |
| M CASEY RODGERS |
| CHARLES J KAHN |
| Racketeer/Corrupt Organization |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 Fed. Question |
| 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
20
ORDER ADOPTING 19 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION. Plaintiffs' Motion for Default Judgment (doc. 13 ) is GRANTED. A default judgment is entered against defendants Eric Campbell, Individual Surety Group, LLC, Steve Stokeling, an d First Fidelity Asurety Company, LLC. Pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1116(a), a permanent injunction against Defendants is entered on the terms provided in the Plaintiffs' Motion for Default Judgment (doc. 13 , pp. 2-3). Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1964(c), Plaintiffs are entitled to attorney's fees in the amount of $83,957.50, including post-judgment interest accruing from the date of judgment as provided by law. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54 (d), 15 U.S.C. § 1117(a), and 18 U.S.C. § 1964(c), Plaintiffs are entitled to costs in the amount of $918.00. Signed by CHIEF JUDGE M CASEY RODGERS on 5/13/2014. (sdw)
|
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 Florida Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
