Guinto et al v. Wells Fargo Bank et al
| Dante Guinto and Joy Guinto |
| Wells Fargo Bank |
| 2:2011cv00372 |
| February 9, 2011 |
| U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Sacramento Office |
| Solano |
| Gregory G. Hollows |
| Lawrence K. Karlton |
| Foreclosure |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
| 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
44
ORDER signed by Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on 10/4/11 REMANDING CASE to State Court. Copy of remand order sent to Solano County Superior Court. CASE CLOSED. (Kaminski, H)
|
|
Filing
39
ORDER signed by Senior Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on 6/30/11 ORDERING the Truth in Lending claims are dismissed for failure to state a claim. The damages claim is barred by the one-year statute of limitations set forth at 15 U.S.C. § 1640(e), an d the rescission claim is barred by the three-year statute of repose set forth at 15 U.S.C. § 1635(f). Plaintiffs are Ordered to Show Cause why this court should not decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over their state law claims, pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. § 1367(c)(3).(Matson, R)
|
|
Filing
35
ORDER signed by Senior Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on 5/16/11 ORDERING that counsel for plaintiff is SANCTIONED in the amount of one hundred and fifty ($150.00) dollars. This sum shall be paid to the Clerk of the Court no later than thirty (30) d ays from the date of this order. Counsel shall file an affidavit accompanying the payment of this sanction which states that it is paid personally by counsel, out of personal funds, and is not and will not be billed, directly or indirectly, to the client or in any way made the responsibility of the client as attorneys' fees or costs. (Becknal, R)
|
|
Filing
31
ORDER signed by Senior Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on 5/13/2011 ORDERING Counsel for pltfs is hereby ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE in writing why sanctions should not issue in accordance with LR 110, including a fine of $150 and/or dismissal of this case, for their failure to file an opposition or statement of non-opposition to the motions; Counsel shall file a response to this OSC no later than 5/23/2011; Additionally, the court does not find oral argument necessary in this matter; the hearing on the motion currently set for 5/23/2011 is VACATED; deadlines for filing reply memoranda, if any, remain unchanged. 16 , 20 (Reader, L)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the California Eastern 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.
