Moore v. Fair Collections & Outsourcing, Inc.
| Cynetra Moore |
| Fair Collections & Outsourcing, Inc. |
| 8:2021cv02522 |
| October 27, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Middle District of Florida |
| Charlene Edwards Honeywell |
| Anthony E Porcelli |
| Consumer Credit |
| 15 U.S.C. ยง 1692 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on December 3, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 12 CERTIFICATE of interested persons and corporate disclosure statement re 4 Notice to Counsel of Local Rule by Cynetra Moore. (Zeig, Justin) |
| Filing 11 NOTICE of a related action per Local Rule 1.07(c) by Cynetra Moore. Related case(s): No (Zeig, Justin) |
Filing 10
ORDER certifying constitutional challenge to the Attorney General of the United States. The Clerk is directed to mail this order, along with a copy of #7 Defendant's Notice of Constitutional Challenge and the docket sheet, to the Attorney General of the United States and the United States Attorney for the Middle District of Florida. See order for details. Signed by Judge Charlene Edwards Honeywell on 11/24/2021. (GLP)
|
| Filing 9 RETURN of service executed on 11/2/2021 by Cynetra Moore as to Fair Collections & Outsourcing, Inc. (Zeig, Justin) Modified text on 11/24/2021 (ABC). |
| Filing 8 CERTIFICATE of interested persons and corporate disclosure statement re 4 Notice to Counsel of Local Rule by Fair Collections & Outsourcing, Inc. (Wonder, Chantel) Modified text on 11/24/2021 (ABC). |
| Filing 7 NOTICE of Constitutional Challenge by Fair Collections & Outsourcing, Inc. re #6 Answer to Complaint Defendant Fair Collections & Outsourcing, Inc.'s Notice of Constitutional Challenge (Wonder, Chantel) Modified text on 11/24/2021 (ABC). |
| Filing 6 Defendant's ANSWER and affirmative defenses to #1 Complaint by Fair Collections & Outsourcing, Inc. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1, #2 Exhibit 2)(Wonder, Chantel) Modified text on 11/24/2021 (ABC). |
| Filing 5 NOTICE informing the parties that they may consent to the jurisdiction of a United States magistrate judge by filing Form AO 85 Notice, Consent, and Reference of a Civil Action to a Magistrate Judge using the event Consent to Jurisdiction of US Magistrate Judge. (Signed by Deputy Clerk). (BGS) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE of Local Rule 1.07(c), Local Rule 3.02(a)(2), and Local Rule 3.03. -Local Rule 1.07(c) requires lead counsel to promptly file a Notice of a Related Action that identifies and describes any related action pending in the Middle District or elsewhere. -Local Rule 3.02(a)(2) requires the parties in every civil proceeding, except those described in subsection (d), to file a case management report (CMR) using the uniform form at www.flmd.uscourts.gov. The CMR must be filed (1) within forty days after any defendant appears in an action originating in this court, (2) within forty days after the docketing of an action removed or transferred to this court, or (3) within seventy days after service on the United States attorney in an action against the United States, its agencies or employees. Judges may have a special CMR form for certain types of cases. These forms can be found at www.flmd.uscourts.gov under the Forms tab for each judge. -Local Rule 3.03 requires each party to file a disclosure statement with the first appearance that identifies (1) each person that has or might have an interest in the outcome, (2) each entity with publicly traded shares or debt potentially affected by the outcome, (3) each additional entity likely to actively participate, and (4) each person arguably eligible for restitution. The disclosure statement must include this certification - I certify that, except as disclosed, I am unaware of an actual or potential conflict of interest affecting the district judge or the magistrate judge in this action, and I will immediately notify the judge in writing within fourteen days after I know of a conflict. (Signed by Deputy Clerk). (BGS) |
| Filing 3 SUMMONS issued as to Fair Collections & Outsourcing, Inc. (CTR) |
| Filing 2 NEW CASE ASSIGNED to Judge Charlene Edwards Honeywell and Magistrate Judge Anthony E. Porcelli. New case number: 8:21-cv-2522-CEH-AEP. (SJB) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Fair Collections & Outsourcing, Inc. with Jury Demand (Filing fee $ 402 receipt number AFLMDC-18864486) filed by Cynetra Moore. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Exhibit A - Letter, #2 Civil Cover Sheet, #3 Proposed Summons)(Zeig, Justin) |
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 Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
| Search for this case: Moore v. Fair Collections & Outsourcing, Inc. | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Cynetra Moore | |
| Represented By: | Justin Zeig |
| 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: Fair Collections & Outsourcing, Inc. | |
| Represented By: | Chantel Christine Wonder |
| 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.
