Arizona Bank & Trust v. Ramundo et al
| Arizona Bank & Trust |
| Mark A Ramundo and Jane Doe Ramundo |
| 2:2008cv01193 |
| June 27, 2008 |
| US District Court for the District of Arizona |
| Contract: Other Office |
| Maricopa |
| Roslyn O Silver |
| None |
| Federal Question |
| 28:1441 Petition for Removal- Contract Default |
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
73
ORDER that Plaintiff Arizona Bank & Trust's Motion for Award of Attorneys' Fees and Expenses (Doc. 69) is granted. FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment in the amount of $45,641.20, plus interest from the date of judgment until paid, in favor of the Plaintiff and against the Defendant. Signed by Judge James A Teilborg on 9/28/10.(KMG)
|
|
Filing
46
ORDER denying without prejudice pla's 30 Motion for Summary Judgment. Pla may re-file a motion for summary judgment after the close of discovery but within the dispositive motion deadline as outlined in this Court's Rule 16 Scheduling Ord er 35 . FURTHER ORDERED that dft Mark A. Ramundo's response to pla's motion for summary judgment and in the alternative motion for Rule 56(f) relief is granted to the extent that he is seeking Rule 56(f) relief. Signed by Judge James A Teilborg on 10/8/2009. (LAD)
|
|
Filing
28
ORDER denying Plaintiff's 9 Motion Pursuant to Rule 16(f). Signed by Judge James A Teilborg on 6/24/09.(REW, )
|
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 Arizona 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.
