Thomas M. Hendrix v. Discount Gold Brokers Inc et al
Thomas M. Hendrix |
Does, Discount Gold Brokers Inc and Michael Berman |
2:2014cv00737 |
January 30, 2014 |
US District Court for the Central District of California |
Stephen J. Hillman |
Fernando M. Olguin |
Contract: Other |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 51 JUDGMENT by Judge Fernando M. Olguin. Pursuant to the Court's Order Re: Plaintiff's Second Motion for Default Judgment 44 , IT IS ADJUDGED THAT: (1) Default judgment shall be entered in favor of plaintiff Thomas M. Hendrix, and against def endant Discount Gold Brokers, Inc.(2) Discount Gold Brokers, Inc. shall pay plaintiff the amount of $75,677.50 on plaintiff's first cause of action for breach of contract in his First Amended Complaint, plus prejudgment interest thereon at the statutory rate of 10% from February 6, 2013 to July 21, 2014, in the amount of $9,908.94, and costs in the amount of $1,587.21. The total amount of the judgment is $87,173.65. (3) Except as set forth above, all other claims in the First Amended Complaint are dismissed without prejudice. (4) Plaintiff shall serve defendants with a copy of this Order and the Judgment filed contemporaneously herewith in such a manner as to make them operative in any future proceedings. (MD JS-6, Case Terminated). (jp) |
Filing 9 (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: DISMISSAL RE: LACK OF PROSECUTION by Judge Fernando M. Olguin. Response to Order to Show Cause due by 3/12/2014. (vdr) |
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.