Lewis v. JPMorgan Chase Bank NA et al
| Pamella Lewis |
| Quality Loan Service and JPMorgan Chase Bank NA |
| 3:2012cv08054 |
| March 23, 2012 |
| US District Court for the District of Arizona |
| Prescott Division Office |
| Coconino |
| Neil V Wake |
| All Other Real Property |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 |
| 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
25
ORDER granting 18 Defendant JPMorgan Chase Bank's Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim. That the clerk enter judgment dismissing this action with prejudice. The clerk shall terminate the case. Signed by Judge Neil V Wake on 10/15/12.(DMT)
|
|
Filing
14
ORDER: Defendant JPMorgan Chase Bank's 11 Motion to Dismiss First Amended Complaint is GRANTED. FURTHER ORDERED that Counts 4, 6-8, and 11-15 of Plaintiff's first amended complaint are DISMISSED with prejudice. FURTHER ORDERED that Counts 1, 2, 3, 5, 9, and 10 are DISMISSED with leave to amend. Plaintiff must file an amended complaint by 07/27/12. Plaintiff's amended complaint must also state her allegations in numbered paragraphs. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 10(b). If Plaintiff doe s not timely file an amended complaint, her case may be dismissed without further warning. FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant Quality Loan Services is DISMISSED without prejudice. See order for complete details. Signed by Judge Neil V. Wake on 6/29/12. (NKS)
|
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.
