David Allen v. J P Morgan Chase Bank NA et al
Plaintiff: David Allen
Defendant: Washington Mutual Bank FA, Does and J P Morgan Chase Bank NA
Case Number: 2:2011cv03609
Filed: April 27, 2011
Court: US District Court for the Central District of California
Presiding Judge: A. Howard Matz
Presiding Judge: Carla Woehrle
Nature of Suit: Contract: Other

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
January 6, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 119 ORDER DISMISSING ACTION by Judge Fernando M. Olguin. (Case Terminated; Made JS-6) (vdr)
January 4, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 88 MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS by Judge A. Howard Matz: Having received the report of the mediation between the parties, the Court hereby extends the stay in this case so that the parties may have additional time to participate in the loan modification mediation program. Before the Court takes further action, theCourt permits and directs the parties to attend the second session of mediation scheduled for February 15, 2013. (smo)
November 5, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 82 MINUTES: Proceedings: MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment filed by Defendant, California Reconveyance Company, Chase Home Finance LLC, JP Morgan Chase Bank NA, Washington Mutual Bank FA 64 (non-evidentiary) before Judge A. Howard Matz (see attached Minute Order for further details). The Court GRANTS in part and DENIES in part the motion with respect to David Allen. Allen may proceed with his claims for breach of contract and promissory estoppel. Additionally, Allen may pursue his fraud claim a imed at Defendants' conduct during the loan modification process. However, Allen has no standing to proceed on the additional theories of fraud addressed by Defendants, including flawed securitization andconcealment. Court Reporter: Katie Thibodeaux. (jp)
July 25, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 53 MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) by Judge A. Howard Matz: The Court DENIES Plaintiffs Request to increase the demand for punitive damages. Based on the foregoing, the Court DENIES Plaintiffs Motion to Amend their First Amended Complaint 47 . No hearing is necessary. Fed. R. Civ. P. 78; Local Rule 7-15. (jp)
Access additional case information on PACER

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 this case: David Allen v. J P Morgan Chase Bank NA et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Washington Mutual Bank FA
Represented By: Christopher J Donewald
Represented By: John M Sorich
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Does
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: J P Morgan Chase Bank NA
Represented By: John M Sorich
Represented By: Christopher J Donewald
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: David Allen
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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.


Why Is My Information Online?