Mountjoy v. Bank of America, N.A.
Plaintiff: Calvin Mountjoy
Defendant: Bank of America, N.A., Seterus, Inc., Federal National Mortgage Association and Recontrust
Case Number: 2:2015cv02204
Filed: October 22, 2015
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of California
Office: Sacramento Office
County: Sacramento
Presiding Judge: Allison Claire
Presiding Judge: Troy L. Nunley
Nature of Suit: Foreclosure
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1345
Jury Demanded By: Both

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
February 9, 2024 Opinion or Order Filing 153 ORDER signed by District Judge Daniel J. Calabretta on 02/07/24 DENYING Plaintiff's request to introduce the testimony of his former spouse, Tracy. (Benson, A.)
December 8, 2023 Opinion or Order Filing 118 TRIAL CONFIRMATION ORDER signed by District Judge Daniel J. Calabretta on 12/07/23 CONFIRMING the Jury Trial set for 2/5/2024 at 8:30 AM in Courtroom 10 before the Honorable Daniel J. Calabretta. Objections due within 14 days. (Benson, A.)
June 20, 2023 Opinion or Order Filing 112 ORDER signed by District Judge Daniel J. Calabretta on 6/16/23 GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART 97 defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment. (See order for further details) (Kastilahn, A) Modified on 6/20/2023 (Kastilahn, A).
March 27, 2023 Opinion or Order Filing 110 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Deborah Barnes on 3/27/23 ORDERING that 108 defendant's Proposed Order is DENIED without prejudice to renewal to filing as part of a motion that complies with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Local Rules. (Kastilahn, A)
March 15, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 93 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Deborah Barnes on 3/14/2022 DENYING 85 Motion to Quash without prejudice to renewal; and The 3/18/2022 hearing of the motion is VACATED. (Mena-Sanchez, L)
December 8, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 84 STIPULATION and ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 12/8/2021 EXTENDING The Discovery cut-off deadline from 12/10/2021 to 3/15/2022.(Mena-Sanchez, L)
June 9, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 82 ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 6/8/2021 GRANTING 81 Ex Parte Application to Modify the Scheduling Order, MODIFYING the 71 Scheduling Order as follows: Discovery completed by 12/10/2021. Designation of Expert Witnesses due by 2/11/2022. Dispositive Motions filed by 6/16/2022. (Coll, A)
April 26, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 80 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Deborah Barnes on 4/26/21 VACATING the 4/30/21 hearing on defendant's 77 motion to compel. Defendant's 77 motion to compel is GRANTED. Plaintiff shall produce to defendant responsive documents, without objection, within 21 days of the date of this order. On or before 5/21/2021, plaintiff's counsel shall pay defendant $1,840.00. (Kastilahn, A) Modified on 4/26/2021 (Kastilahn, A).
April 14, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 78 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Deborah Barnes on 04/13/21 VACATING 72 the Motion to Compel Hearing and GRANTING 72 Motion to Compel. Plaintiff shall produce to defendant responsive documents within 21 days of the date of this order. On or before May 7, 2021, plaintiffs counsel shall pay defendant $2,140.00. (Plummer, M)
March 16, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 76 ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Deborah Barnes on 3/16/2021 ORDERING the hearing re 72 Motion to Compel is CONTINUED to 4/16/2021 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 27 (DB) before Magistrate Judge Deborah Barnes. Within fourteen days plaintiff shall sh ow good cause in writing for plaintiff's conduct. On or before 4/2/2021, plaintiff shall file a response to defendant's motion. Defendant may file a reply to plaintiff's response on or before 4/9/2021. Plaintiff is cautioned that the failure to timely comply with this order may result in an order imposing an appropriate sanction. (Zignago, K.)
April 8, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 67 ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 4/7/2020 GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART 50 Motion to Dismiss. Plaintiff is GRANTED twenty-one (21) days from the date of this Order to file a Fourth Amended Complaint that fully complies with the Court's Order. Plaintiff is not permitted leave to amend beyond the confines of this Order. Defendant is afforded twenty-one (21) days from the date Plaintiff files an amended complaint to file an answer. (Zignago, K.)
March 28, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 48 ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 03/27/18 ORDERING that, pursuant to 47 Stipulation, plaintiffs shall file a Third Amended Complaint by 05/07/18; defendants to file an answer or motion to dismiss within 21 days from plaintiffs filing of their Third Amended complaint. (Benson, A.)
February 13, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 46 ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 2/12/2018 GRANTING the parties stipulation for continuance. Plaintiffs shall file a Third Amended Complaint by 3/25/2018. Defendants to file an answer or motion to dismiss within 21 days from plaintiffs filing of their Third Amended complaint. (Zignago, K.)
January 8, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 44 ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 1/8/2018 ORDERING Plaintiff's first claim is DISMISSED without prejudice against Seterus and DISMISSED only insofar as it asserts a claim under § 2923.6 against BANA;Seterus's motion to dismiss Plaintiff's second claim is GRANTED with prejudice and BANA's motion to dismiss the second claim is GRANTED with leave to amend; Both Seterus and BANA's motion to dismiss Plaintiff's third claim are GRANTED with leave to amend; Seterus's motion to dismiss Plaintiff's fourth claim is GRANTED with prejudice and BANA's motion to dismiss the fourth claim is GRANTED with leave to amend; Seterus's motion to dismiss Plaintiff's fifth claim is GRANTED with prejudice and BANA's motion to dismiss the fifth claim is GRANTED with leave to amend; Both Seterus's and BANA's motion to dismiss Plaintiff's sixth claim are GRANTED with leave to amend; Seterus's motion to dismiss Plaintiff's seventh claim is DENIED; Both Seterus's and BANA's motion to dismiss Plaintiff's eighth claim are GRANTED with leave to amend; Both Seterus's and BANA's motion to dismiss Plaintiff's eleventh claim are GRANTED with leave to amend; Seterus's motion to dismiss Plaintiff's twelfth claim is DENIED and BANA's motion to dismiss Plaintiff's twelfth claim is GRANTED with leave to amend; Seterus's motion to dismiss Plaintiff's thirteenth claim is DENIED; and Defendant ReConTrust is DISMISSED in its entirety. Plaintiff is granted thirty (30) days from the date of this Order to file a Third Amended Complaint. Plaintiff is not permitted leave to amend beyond the confines of this order. Defendants are afforded twenty-one (21) days from the date Plaintiff files an amended complaint to file an answer.(Becknal, R)
August 31, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 28 ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 8/31/2016 DENYING 27 Motion for TRO. (Donati, J)
August 12, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 24 ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 8/11/2016 DENYING 22 Motion for Temporary Restraining Order. (Michel, G.)
August 9, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 21 ORDER granting in part and denying in part defendant's 13 Motion to Dismiss, signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 8/8/16. Should Plaintiff wish to file an amended complaint, such complaint must be filed within 30 days of the entry of this order. (Kastilahn, A)
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: Mountjoy v. Bank of America, N.A.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Calvin Mountjoy
Represented By: Kimberly Ann Harrison
Represented By: Dennise Suzanne Henderson
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: Bank of America, N.A.
Represented By: Matthew Adam Garfinkle
Represented By: Marquis I. Wraight
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: Seterus, Inc.
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: Federal National Mortgage Association
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: Recontrust
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?