Wallace et al v. Buckingham Property Mgt., et al
Plaintiff: |
Cleveland Wallace and Rita Wallace |
Defendant: |
Buckingham Property Management, Budget Prepay, Inc. and Sparkles Carwash & Lube |
Case Number: |
2:2016cv01000 |
Filed: |
May 11, 2016 |
Court: |
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California |
Office: |
Sacramento Office |
County: |
Colusa |
Presiding Judge: |
Carolyn K. Delaney |
Presiding Judge: |
Troy L. Nunley |
Nature of Suit: |
Other Contract |
Cause of Action: |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
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 |
February 3, 2017 |
Filing
49
FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 02/02/17 RECOMMENDING that defendant's 38 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings be granted, that defendant Buckingham be dismissed with prejudice and this action be closed; referred to Judge Troy L. Nunley; Objections to these F&Rs due within 14 days. (Benson, A)
|
January 4, 2017 |
Filing
39
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 1/4/2017 ORDERING the 38 Motion to Dismiss Hearing CONTINUED to 2/15/2017 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 24 (CKD) before Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney. Plaintiffs shall file opposition, if an y, no later than 1/25/2017. Failure to file opposition will be deemed as a statement of non-opposition and shall result in submission of the motion on the papers and a recommendation that this action be dismissed pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). Reply, if any, due by 2/1/2017. (Washington, S)
|
December 6, 2016 |
Filing
34
ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 12/5/2016 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 31 are ADOPTED in FULL; Defendants' 16 , 17 Motion to Dismiss are GRANTED; and Defendants Budget Prepay, Inc. and Sparkles Carwash & Lube are DISMISSED with Prejudice. (Reader, L)
|
November 9, 2016 |
Filing
33
ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 11/8/2016 ADOPTING IN FULL 21 Findings and Recommendations; DENYING 19 Motion for Temporary Restraining Order. (Michel, G.)
|
September 22, 2016 |
Filing
31
FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 09/22/16 RECOMMENDING that defendants' 16 17 Motions to Dismiss be granted and defendants Budget Prepay, Inc. and Sparkes Carwash & Lube be dismissed with prejudice. Referred to Judge Troy L. Nunley; Objections to these F&Rs due within 14 days. (Benson, A)
|
August 12, 2016 |
Filing
23
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 8/12/16 ORDERING that the hearing date of 8/24/16 is VACATED. Hearing on Defendants' MOTIONS 17 and 16 is CONTINUED to 9/21/2016 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 24 (CKD) before Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney. Plaintiff shall file opposition, to the MOTIONS no later than 8/31/16. Reply, shall be filed no later than 9/7/16.(Mena-Sanchez, L)
|
August 11, 2016 |
Filing
21
FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 8/11/2016 RECOMMENDING that plaintiffs' 19 motion for temporary restraining order be denied. Motion referred to Judge Troy L. Nunley. Objections to F&R due within 14 days. (Zignago, K.)
|
June 27, 2016 |
Filing
10
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 6/27/16 ORDERING that the Order to Show Cause 4 is DISCHARGED. (Mena-Sanchez, L)
|
May 17, 2016 |
Filing
4
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 5/17/2016 ORDERING that no later than 5/31/2016, plaintiffs shall show cause why this action should not be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. (Reader, L)
|
Access additional case information on PACER
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
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?