Dixon v. Monterey Financial Services, Inc.
Edith Dixon |
Monterey Financial Services, Inc. |
3:2015cv03298 |
July 16, 2015 |
US District Court for the Northern District of California |
San Francisco Office |
Alameda |
Laurel Beeler |
Other Statutory Actions |
47 U.S.C. ยง 227 |
Plaintiff |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 67 ORDER. Pursuant to the parties' stipulation, the entire case is dismissed with prejudice as to plaintiff and without prejudice as to the putative class. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on December 16, 2016. (mmclc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/16/2016) |
Filing 57 ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STRIKE PLAINTIFF'S CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS; AFFORDING PLAINTIFF FURTHER LEAVE TO AMEND. The class action allegations in the Second Amended Complaint are stricken. If plaintiff wishes to file a Third Amended Complaint for the purpose of amending her class action allegations, plaintiff shall file such pleading no later than September 9, 2016. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on August 22, 2016. (mmclc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/22/2016) |
Filing 50 ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND TO STRIKE; AFFORDING PLAINTIFF LEAVE TO AMEND. To the extent the motion seeks summary judgment on plaintiff's claims, the motion is denied. To the extent the motion seeks an order striking the class action allegations, the motion is granted, and the class action allegations are stricken. If plaintiff wishes to file a Second Amended Complaint for the purpose of amending her class action allegat ions, plaintiff shall file such pleading no later than July 15, 2016. If plaintiff does not do so within the time provided, the instant action will proceed on plaintiff's individual claims.Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on June 24, 2016. (mmclc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/24/2016) |
Filing 49 ORDER VACATING HEARING ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND TO STRIKE. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on June 17, 2016. (mmclc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/17/2016) |
Filing 38 PRETRIAL PREPARATION ORDER. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on 12/14/15. (tlS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/15/2015) |
Filing 30 ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO SUBMIT CHAMBERS COPY OF COMPLAINT AND FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on November 4, 2015. (mmclc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/4/2015) |
Filing 28 ORDER, Case reassigned to Hon. Maxine M. Chesney. Magistrate Judge Laurel Beeler no longer assigned to the case.. Signed by Executive Committee on 10/26/15. (haS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/26/2015) |
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 Northern 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
Search for this case: Dixon v. Monterey Financial Services, Inc. | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Plaintiff: Edith Dixon | |
Represented By: | Todd Michael Friedman |
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: Monterey Financial Services, 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 ] |
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.