Alphonso Jackson v. Property I.D. Corporation et al
| Alphonso Jackson |
| Property I.D. Corporation, Realogy Corp, NRT/Coldwell Banker Residential Brokerage Corp, Mason-McDuffie Real Estate Inc, Pickford Golden State Member LLC, Property I.D. of East Bay LLC, Property I.D. Associates LLC and Property I.D. Golden State LLC |
| Pickford Realty Ltd |
| 2:2007cv03372 |
| May 23, 2007 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Western Division - Los Angeles Office |
| XX US, Outside California |
| Jacqueline Chooljian |
| Margaret M. Morrow |
| Other Statutory Actions |
| 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
111
CONSENT DECREE by Judge George H. King: This Consent Decree is entered into between the Plaintiff The Secretary of the US Department of Housing and Urban Developement (HUD) and Defendant Realogy Corporation. IT IS THEREFORE NOW ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED as follows: The Realogy Defendants are enjoined from engaging in any activities that are alleged in the Complaint to violate RESPA and will comply with RESPA. The Realogy Defendants shall provide to the Secretary documentation demonstrating that the Realogy Defendants have paid at least $4,000,000 under the Class Settlement. Each of the Parties to this Consent Decree shall bear their own attorney's fees and costs. (See document for further details). (mg)
|
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 California Central 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.
