Brody Tice et al v. Roark Lamberton-Davies
Plaintiff: Brody Tice, Rearden Lamberton and Paul Greenan
Defendant: Roark Lamberton Davies
Case Number: 2:2024cv06347
Filed: July 26, 2024
Court: US District Court for the Central District of California
Presiding Judge: Charles F Eick
Referring Judge: Otis D Wright
Nature of Suit: Personal Property: Other
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-(Citizenship)
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on August 23, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
August 23, 2024 Filing 14 FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT against Defendant Roark Lamberton Davies amending Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening),, #1 , filed by Plaintiff Brody Tice, Rearden Lamberton, Paul Greenan(Hill, Christopher)
August 23, 2024 Filing 13 STIPULATION Extending Time to Answer the complaint as to Roark Lamberton Davies answer now due 9/23/2024, filed by Defendant Roark Lamberton Davies.(Attorney Edward A Hoffman added to party Roark Lamberton Davies(pty:dft))(Hoffman, Edward)
August 14, 2024 Filing 12 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Brody Tice, upon Defendant Roark Lamberton Davies served on 8/2/2024, answer due 8/23/2024. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon Roark Lamberton-Davies, Defendant in compliance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure by personal service (Hill, Christopher)
July 30, 2024 Opinion or Order Filing 11 MINUTE ORDER (IN CHAMBERS) by Judge Otis D. Wright, II. This action has been assigned to the calendar of Judge Otis D. Wright II. EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY No mandatory chambers copies required, EXCEPT FOR motions for summary judgment and any other evidence-heavy motions. Counsel are STRONGLY encouraged to review the Central District's website for additional information. The address is "http://www.cacd.uscourts.gov." (SEE DOCUMENT FOR FURTHER DETAILS.) (rolm)
July 29, 2024 Filing 10 NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff Paul Greenan, Rearden Lamberton, Brody Tice, identifying Lance Lamberton. (Hill, Christopher)
July 29, 2024 Filing 9 21 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening),, #1 as to Defendant Roark Lamberton Davies. (sh)
July 29, 2024 Filing 8 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening),, #1 filed by Plaintiff Paul Greenan, Rearden Lamberton, Brody Tice. (Hill, Christopher)
July 29, 2024 Filing 7 NOTICE OF DEFICIENCIES in Attorney Case Opening RE: Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening),, #1 . The following error(s) was found: No Notice of Interested Parties has been filed. A Notice of Interested Parties must be filed with every partys first appearance. See Local Rule 7.1-1. Counsel must file a Notice of Interested Parties immediately. Failure to do so may be addressed by judicial action, including sanctions. See Local Rule 83-7. Attachment(s): # 1 Civil Cover Sheet. The document(s) should have been filed separately using their true events. You are not required to take any action to correct this deficiency unless the Court so directs. (sh)
July 29, 2024 Filing 6 21 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening),, #1 as to Defendant Roark Lamberton Davies. (sh)
July 29, 2024 Filing 5 Notice to Counsel Re Consent to Proceed Before a United States Magistrate Judge. (sh)
July 29, 2024 Filing 4 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (sh)
July 29, 2024 Filing 3 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Otis D. Wright, II and Magistrate Judge Charles F. Eick. (sh)
July 29, 2024 Filing 2 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening),, #1 filed by Plaintiff Paul Greenan, Rearden Lamberton, Brody Tice. (Hill, Christopher)
July 26, 2024 Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: ACACDC-37912799 - Fee: $405, filed by Plaintiff Brody Tice, Rearden Lamberton, Paul Greenan. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Exhibit A - Superior Courts Ruling dated Jan. 23, 2019, #3 Exhibit B - Superior Court decision, dated July 9, 2019) (Attorney Christopher S Hill added to party Paul Greenan(pty:pla), Attorney Christopher S Hill added to party Rearden Lamberton(pty:pla), Attorney Christopher S Hill added to party Brody Tice(pty:pla))(Hill, Christopher)

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: Brody Tice et al v. Roark Lamberton-Davies
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Brody Tice
Represented By: Christopher S Hill
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: Rearden Lamberton
Represented By: Christopher S Hill
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: Paul Greenan
Represented By: Christopher S Hill
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: Roark Lamberton Davies
Represented By: Edward A Hoffman
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?