Davis v. Hollins Law
Plaintiff: Michael Davis
Defendant: Hollins Law
Case Number: 2:2012cv03107
Filed: December 28, 2012
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of California
Office: Sacramento Office
County: Sacramento
Presiding Judge: Gregory G. Hollows
Presiding Judge: Lawrence K. Karlton
Nature of Suit: Consumer Credit
Cause of Action: 15 U.S.C. ยง 1692 Fair Debt Collection Act
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
October 21, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 123 ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 10/20/16 ORDERING the Clerk of the Court for the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California is to return the entire cash deposit made by Defendant in the amount of $47,483.07. (cc Finance) (Washington, S)
August 28, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 114 ORDER signed by Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on 8/27/2014 STAYING execution of judgment, upon receipt of the defendant's cash deposit of $47,483.07 by the Clerk of Court, pending resolution of the appeal; DIRECTING the Clerk of Court to releas e sufficient funds from the cash deposit to the plaintiff upon resolution of the appeal to satisfy the judgment herein, including any post-judgment interest allowable by law, and to return the remaining balance, if any, to defendant. (cc: Sacramento Financial) (Michel, G)
June 24, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 106 ORDER signed by Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on 6/24/14 ORDERING that the court hereby GRANTS plaintiff's bill of costs in the amount of $1923.15. (Kastilahn, A)
June 12, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 102 ORDER signed by Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on 6/10/2014. Plaintiff is AWARDED $250.00 in statutory damages under FDCPA. Plaintiff's 93 Motion for Award of Attorney's Fees is DENIED without prejudice. Plaintiff is AWARDED $35,813.30 in attorney's fees under FDCPA and Rosenthal Act. (Marciel, M)
May 14, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 101 ORDER signed by Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on 5/14/2014 ORDERING 100 Application for Order Shortening Time to Hear Defendant's Motion to Strike Plaintiff's Motion for Award of Statutory Damages is DENIED, Plaintiff's 98 Motion for Le ave to File a Reply Brief in Support of his Petition for Attorney's Fees and Costs is DENIED, The hearings on Plaintiffs 93 Motion for Award of Statutory Damages and Defendants 94 Motion toStrike Plaintiffs Motion for Award of Statutory Dama ges, both currently set for June 2, 2014, are VACATED. Parties are WARNED that the filing of any further briefs or motions before the court issues an order deciding the issues of damages and attorney's fees and costs may be grounds for substantial sanctions. (Waggoner, D) Modified on 5/14/2014 (Waggoner, D).
March 3, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 81 ORDER signed by Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on 2/28/14: Court Trial RESET for 4/8/2014 at 10:30 AM in Courtroom 4 (LKK) before Judge Lawrence K. Karlton. Plaintiff's motion in limine #1 is DENIED. Plaintiff's motion in limine #2 is GRAN TED. Defendant's motion in limine #1 is GRANTED. Defendant's motion in limine #2 is DENIED. Defendant's motion in limine #3 is DENIED. Defendant's motion in limine #4 is GRANTED. Defendant's motion in limine #5 is GRANTED. Defendant's motion in limine #6 is GRANTED. Defendant's motion in limine #7 is GRANTED. (Kaminski, H)
February 26, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 80 ORDER signed by Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on 2/26/2014 ORDERING that the motion hearing set for 3/3/2014 at 10:00 AM regarding the Motions in Limine in the present matter is hereby VACATED. 68 , 69 (Reader, L)
September 12, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 57 ORDER signed by Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on 9/11/13 DENYING 35 Motion for Summary Judgment and 43 Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment. (Manzer, C)
August 21, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 53 STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on 8/20/13 ORDERING Defendant is hereby DIRECTED to file a statement with the court indicating whether it wishes to continue the hearing on the cross-motions for summary judgment from Septe mber 9, 2013 to September 23, 2013 subject to the conditions set forth above. The statement must be filed no later than 4:30 p.m. on Wednesday, August 21, 2013. In the absence of such a statement, the court will assume that defendant no longer has any objection to the existing hearing date, and the matter will be heard on September 9 as scheduled. (Becknal, R)
August 16, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 45 ORDER signed by Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on 8/16/2013 ORDERING plaintiff to file, no later than 4:30 p.m. on 8/19/13, a response to defendant's statement of undisputed facts which satisfies the requirements of Local Rule 260(b). (Donati, J)
August 8, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 42 ORDER signed by Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on 8/7/13 ORDERING that the hearing as to 35 Motion for Summary Judgment is CONTINUED to 9/9/2013 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 4 (LKK) before Judge Lawrence K. Karlton. Deadlines for opposition and reply remain unchanged. (Manzer, C)
July 29, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 40 ORDER signed by Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on 7/29/2013 DENYING 33 Defendant's Request for leave to file a motion to compel. (Reader, L)
March 20, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 24 STATUS (PRETRIAL SCHEDULING )ORDER signed by Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on 3/20/2013 ORDERING that all law and motion, except as to discovery, be heard by 9/5/2013; ORDERING that all Oppositions and Statements of Non-Oppositions be filed by 4:30 PM, 1 4 days prior to the hearing date; ORDERING that discovery be completed by 7/5/2013; ORDERING that all experts be designated 45 days prior to the close of discovery; ORDERING that Joint Mid-Litigation Statements be filed 14 days prior to the close of discovery; SETTING a Final Pretrial Conference for 12/2/2013 at 2:00 PM in Courtroom 4 (LKK) before Judge Lawrence K. Karlton; ORDERING that a Joint Statement be filed 7 days prior to the Final Pretrial Conference; SETTING a Jury Trial for 3/11/2014 at 10:30 AM in Courtroom 4 (LKK) before Judge Lawrence K. Karlton. (Michel, G)
March 15, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 21 ORDER signed by Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on 3/14/2013 ORDERING that defendant's 6 Motion to Dismiss, and 7 Motion to Strike are DENIED. (Reader, L)
March 7, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 18 ORDER signed by Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on 3/7/13. The Court does not find oral argument to be necessary and will decide Motions 6 and 7 on the papers. The hearing currently scheduled for 3/11/13 is VACATED.(Mena-Sanchez, L)
February 8, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 9 STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on 2/8/2013 CONTINUING the Motion Hearing as to 6 Motion to Dismiss, 7 Motion to Strike Plaintiff's Second Count to 3/11/2013 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 4 (LKK) before Judge Lawrence K. Karlton; ORDERING that an Opposition be filed by 2/25/2013; ORDERING that a Reply be filed by 3/4/2013. (Michel, G)
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 Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Davis v. Hollins Law
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Michael Davis
Represented By: Jessica Lynn Pascale
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: Hollins Law
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?