The Bank of New York Mellon v. Bourland
Plaintiff: The Bank of New York Mellon
Defendant: Kent R. Bourland
Case Number: 2:2018cv00788
Filed: April 5, 2018
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of California
Office: Sacramento Office
County: Sacramento
Presiding Judge: Carolyn K. Delaney
Presiding Judge: John A. Mendez
Nature of Suit: All Other Real Property
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441
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
April 9, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 3 ORDER signed by District Judge John A. Mendez on 4/9/18 REMANDING CASE to Superior Court of California, County of Shasta. Copy of remand order sent to other court. 2 Motion to Proceed IFP is DENIED as moot. (Kaminski, H)
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: The Bank of New York Mellon v. Bourland
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: The Bank of New York Mellon
Represented By: Randall D. Naiman
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: Kent R. Bourland
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?