Smulley v. Mutual of Omaha Bank et al
| Dorothy A. Smulley |
| Mutual of Omaha Bank, Erin Bowen, Erin Alicata, Webster Financial Corp, Zeldes, Needle & Cooper, PC, Imagineers, LLC and Oronoque Shores Condominium Association No. 1, Inc. |
| 3:2014cv00997 |
| July 11, 2014 |
| US District Court for the District of Connecticut |
| New Haven Office |
| Fairfield |
| Jeffrey A. Meyer |
| Racketeer/Corrupt Organization |
| 18 U.S.C. ยง 1964 Racketeering (RICO) Act |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
128
RULING GRANTING MOTIONS TO DISMISS. For the reasons set forth in the attached ruling, defendants' motions to dismiss (Docs. # 104 , # 111 , # 114 ) are GRANTED. This case is dismissed with prejudice because any amended complaint to state a RICO or due process claim would be futile. The Clerk of Court shall close this case. It is so ordered. Signed by Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer on 8/10/2017. (Levenson, C.)
|
|
Filing
90
ORDER: Plaintiff's motions for joinder, for leave to amend the complaint, and for costs incurred in connection with service of process (Docs. # 75 , # 76 , # 77 ) are GRANTED. Plaintiff's motion for default entry (Doc. # 86 ) is DENIED. Plaintiff's motions for adjudication (Docs. # 88 , # 89 ) are now moot, in light of this ruling. Signed by Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer on 10/24/2016. (Levenson, C.)
|
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 Connecticut 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
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.
