Merrill Lynch Pierce Fenner and Smith Incorporated v. Carrie Riley
| Merrill Lynch Pierce Fenner and Smith Incorporated and Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner and Smith Incorporated |
| Carrie Riley |
| 2:2016cv04973 |
| July 7, 2016 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Patrick J Walsh |
| Stephen V Wilson |
| Other Statutes: Arbitration |
| 09 U.S.C. § 0009 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 18, 2016. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 21 JUDGMENT by Judge Stephen V. Wilson, in favor of Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner and Smith Incorporated against Carrie Riley in the principal amount of $613,697.99, Related to: Order on Motion for Default Judgment, #19 . (MD JS-6, Case Terminated). (mrgo) |
| Filing 20 NOTICE OF LODGING filed with Proposed Judgment re Order on Motion for Default Judgment, #19 (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order Proposed Judgment)(Murtagh, Jason) |
Filing 19
MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) - ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT by Judge Stephen V. Wilson re: #16 MOTION for Default Judgment. The Court ENTERS JUDGMENT for plaintiff and against defendant in the total amount of $613,697.99. The prevailing party shall submit a proposed judgment consistent with this order. (mrgo)
|
| Filing 18 RESPONSE BY THE COURT TO NOTICE TO FILER OF DEFICIENCIES IN ELECTRONICALLY FILED DOCUMENTS RE: Notice of Deficiency in Electronically Filed Documents (G-112A),, #17 by Clerk of Court. The document is accepted as filed. (mrgo) |
| Filing 17 NOTICE TO FILER OF DEFICIENCIES in Electronically Filed Documents RE: NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION for Default Judgment against Defendant Carrie Riley #16 . The following error(s) was found: Hearing information is missing, incorrect, or not timely. Other error(s) with document(s) are specified below: Hearing information is missing form the Motion. In response to this notice the court may order (1) an amended or correct document to be filed (2) the document stricken or (3) take other action as the court deems appropriate. You need not take any action in response to this notice unless and until the court directs you to do so. (cr) |
| Filing 16 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION for Default Judgment against Defendant Carrie Riley filed by Plaintiff Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner and Smith Incorporated. Motion set for hearing on 11/14/2016 at 01:30 PM before Judge Stephen V. Wilson. (Attachments: #1 Declaration Declaration of Jason Murtagh in Support of Motion for Default Judgment, #2 Proposed Order) (Murtagh, Jason) |
|
Filing 15
IN CHAMBERS ORDER-TEXT ONLY ENTRY by Judge Stephen V. Wilson: The Court's Order to Show Cause, issued on 10/06/2016, is DISCHARGED. The plaintiff is granted thirty days to move for default judgment. THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY. (pc) TEXT ONLY ENTRY
|
| Filing 14 DEFAULT BY CLERK F.R.Civ.P.55(a) as to Carrie Riley. (mrgo) |
| Filing 13 REQUEST for Clerk to Enter Default against Defendant Carrie Riley filed by Plaintiff Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner and Smith Incorporated. (Attachments: #1 Declaration In Support of Request to Enter Default, With Exhibits) (Murtagh, Jason) |
|
Filing 12
IN CHAMBERS - ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THIS CASE SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR LACK OF PROSECUTION by Judge Stephen V. Wilson: The file in this case lacks the papers that would show it is being timely prosecuted, as reflected below. Accordingly, the Court, on its own motion, hereby orders plaintiff(s) to show cause in writing no later than October 27, 2016 why this action should not be dismissed as to all remaining defendants for lack of prosecution. (cr)
|
| Filing 11 PROCESS RECEIPT AND RETURN (USM-285) of summons and Petition (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 upon Carrie Riley served on 8/11/2016, answer due 9/1/2016, served by Personal Service by Deputy USM service, by Federal statute, upon Carrie Riley, Defendant. (Murtagh, Jason) |
| Filing 10 21 DAY Summons Issued re Petition (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 as to Defendant Carrie Riley. (pj) |
| Filing 9 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Petition (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 filed by Plaintiff Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner and Smith Incorporated. (Murtagh, Jason) |
|
Filing 8
ORDER DIRECTING SERVICE BY U.S. MARSHAL by Judge Stephen V. Wilson re: #4 MOTION for Order. (mrgo)
|
|
Filing 7
NEW CASE ORDER upon filing of the complaint by Judge Stephen V. Wilson. (pc)
|
| Filing 6 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (esa) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Stephen V. Wilson and Magistrate Judge Patrick J. Walsh. (esa) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION for Order for Directing Service by U.S. Marshal filed by Plaintiff Merrill Lynch Pierce Fenner & Smith Incorporated. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order Directing Service by U.S. Marshal) (Murtagh, Jason) |
| Filing 3 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiff Merrill Lynch Pierce Fenner & Smith Incorporated. (Murtagh, Jason) |
| Filing 2 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT filed by Plaintiff Merrill Lynch Pierce Fenner & Smith Incorporated identifying Bank of America Corp. and NB Holdings Corp. as Corporate Parent. (Murtagh, Jason) |
| Filing 1 PETITION to Confirm Arbitration Award Receipt No: 0973-18146737 - Fee: $400, filed by Plaintiff Merrill Lynch Pierce Fenner & Smith Incorporated. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit to Motion to Confirm Arbitration Award) (Attorney Jason E Murtagh added to party Merrill Lynch Pierce Fenner & Smith Incorporated(pty:pla))(Murtagh, Jason) |
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 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.
