Page v. Impac Mortgage Holdings, Inc et al
| Sharon Page |
| Leigh J Abrams, Stephen R Peers, William E Rose, William S Ashmore, James Walsh, Frank P Filipps, Impac Mortgage Holdings, Inc, Joseph R Tomkinson, Gretchen D Verdugo, Sheralee Urbano, The Impac Mortgages Compensation, Employee Compensation and Benefits Committee and DOES |
| 8:2007cv01447 |
| December 17, 2007 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Southern Division - Santa Ana Office |
| Orange |
| Arthur Nakazato |
| James V. Selna |
| Labor: E.R.I.S.A. |
| 29 U.S.C. ยง 1132 E.R.I.S.A.-Employee Benefits |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
76
ORDER and FINAL JUDGMENT by Judge Andrew J. Guilford. (See Order for details) (MD JS-6) (db)
|
|
Filing
61
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS MOTIONS TO DISMISS UNDER FEDERAL RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 12(b)(1) AND 12(b)(6)by Judge Andrew J. Guilford. Defendants Motion to Dismiss the first amended complaint is DENIED in part and GRANTED i n part with leave to amend. Defendants Motion is GRANTED with leave to amend as to the Fourth and Sixth Claims for Relief, and as to Defendants Verdugo, Walsh, Filipps, Peers, Rose, Abrams, Tomkinson, and Ashmore. If Plaintiff desires to do so, she shall file a second amended complaint within 21 days hereof setting forth adequate allegations against Defendants. (smi)
|
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.
