In re Joseph Edward Putney and Julie Anna Putney
Appellant: Minh Cong Dang
Appellee: Joseph Edward Putney and Julie Anna Putney
Case Number: 5:2019cv01658
Filed: August 28, 2019
Court: US District Court for the Central District of California
Presiding Judge: Otis D Wright
Nature of Suit: Bankruptcy Appeal (801)
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 0158
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on October 2, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
October 2, 2019 Filing 7 NOTICE OF BANKRUPTCY APPEAL DOCUMENT DISCREPANCY regarding Statement of Issues, designation of Record, Notice of Transcript, Transcripts were not filed as required forwarded to Judge Otis D. Wright, II. (lc)
September 27, 2019 Filing 8 AMENDED ELECTION NOTICE OF APPEAL AND STATEMENT OF ELECTION Re: ORDER to Show Cause why Minh Cong Dang should not be held in contempt entered 9/4/19. Bankruptcy Court case number: 6:17-bk-18961 MW, Adversary number: NA, BAP case number: NA. #1 filed by Appellant Minh Cong Dang. (lc)
August 29, 2019 Filing 6 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (esa)
August 29, 2019 Filing 5 NOTICE REGARDING APPEAL FROM BANKRUPTCY COURT. The appeal has been assigned to Judge Otis D. Wright, II. Refer to the Notice for specifics. (esa) Modified on 9/3/2019 (esa).
August 29, 2019 Filing 4 NOTICE OF DEFICIENCIES IN APPEAL FROM BANKRUPTCY COURT regarding Missing: Entered date of order; address and phone numbers of opposing parties; entered stamped copy of order forwarded to Judge Otis D. Wright, II. (esa)
August 29, 2019 Filing 3 NOTICE OF REFERRAL OF APPEAL prepared by the United States Bankruptcy Court on 8/29/19. (esa)
August 28, 2019 Filing 2 NOTICE OF APPEAL DEFICIENCY TO APPELLANT regarding Lack of entered date of order; lack of names, addresses, and telephone numbers of opposing parties; lack of entered stamped copy of order.(esa)
August 28, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 1 NOTICE OF APPEAL AND STATEMENT OF ELECTION Re: ORDER to Show Cause why Minh Cong Dang should not be held in contempt of Court for knowingly violating discharge injunction entered on 8/19/19 by Bankruptcy Judge Mark S. Wallace, filed in the Bankruptcy Court on 8/28/19. Bankruptcy Court case number: 6:17-bk-18961 MW, Adversary number: NA, BAP case number: NA., filed by appellant Minh Cong Dang. (Attachments: #1 BAP Dkt) (esa)

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: In re Joseph Edward Putney and Julie Anna Putney
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Appellant: Minh Cong Dang
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 ]
Appellee: Joseph Edward Putney
Represented By: Jenny Lynn Doling
Represented By: Summer M Shaw
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 ]
Appellee: Julie Anna Putney
Represented By: Jenny Lynn Doling
Represented By: Summer M Shaw
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?