Dyer v. The Bank of New York Mellon
Plaintiff: Neil Dyer
Defendant: The Bank of New York Mellon
Case Number: 5:2017cv00130
Filed: March 28, 2017
Court: US District Court for the Middle District of Florida
Office: Ocala Office
County: Lake
Presiding Judge: Philip R. Lammens
Presiding Judge: James S. Moody
Nature of Suit: Foreclosure
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1345
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
March 29, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 5 ORDER dismissing case with prejudice, each party to bear their own attorney's fees and costs. All pending motions are denied as moot. The Clerk is directed to close this case. Signed by Judge James S. Moody, Jr. on 3/29/2017. (LN)
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 Florida Middle District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Dyer v. The Bank of New York Mellon
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Neil Dyer
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: The Bank of New York Mellon
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?