Daniels, Jr. v. Monarch Recovery Management, Inc. et al
Plaintiff: Richard Daniels, Jr.
Defendant: Monarch Recovery Management Inc. and Monarch Recovery Management, Inc.
Case Number: 8:2022cv00418
Filed: February 21, 2022
Court: US District Court for the Middle District of Florida
Presiding Judge: Virginia M Hernandez Covington
Referring Judge: Christopher P Tuite
Nature of Suit: Consumer Credit
Cause of Action: 15 U.S.C. ยง 1681
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on February 22, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
February 22, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 9 ENDORSED ORDER: Upon careful review, Defendant's Unopposed Motion to Stay (Doc. #3) is granted. District courts have the power "to stay proceedings in one suit until the decision of another" in furtherance of the fair and efficient administration of justice. Landis v. N. Am. Co., 299 U.S. 248 (1936). As explained in the Motion, the Eleventh Circuit has recently vacated the panel's decision in Hunstein v. Preferred Collection & Mgmt. Servs., Inc., ___ F.4th ___, 2021 WL 4998980, at *1 (11th Cir. Oct. 28, 2021), and taken the case en banc. See Hunstein v. Preferred Collection & Mgmt. Servs., Inc., No. 19-14434 (11th Cir. Nov. 17, 2021) ("A judge of this Court having requested a poll on whether this case should be reheard en banc, and a majority of the judges of this Court in active service having voted in favor, the Court sua sponte ORDERS that this case will be reheard en banc. The panel's opinion is VACATED."). The Court finds that the Eleventh Circuit's en banc resolution in Hunstein will have a substantial impact on the case at bar, especially on the issue of Article III standing. Therefore, in the interests of justice and judicial economy, the Court will stay this action pending the Eleventh Circuit's en banc decision in Hunstein. See Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida v. S. Florida Water Mgmt. Dist., 559 F.3d 1191, 1197 (11th Cir. 2009) (explaining that "awaiting a federal appellate decision that is likely to have a substantial or controlling effect on the claims and issues" in the pending lawsuit is "at least a good [reason], if not an excellent one" to stay an action). Accordingly, the Court orders that this case be stayed and administratively closed. The parties are directed that, within 30 days of the issuance of the Eleventh Circuit's en banc decision in Hunstein, they must file a notice advising the Court of the same and stating their positions as to whether this matter should be reopened. Signed by Judge Virginia M. Hernandez Covington on 2/22/2022. (CTL)
February 22, 2022 Filing 8 NOTICE of a related action per Local Rule 1.07(c) by Richard Daniels, Jr. Related case(s): No (Raslavich, Benjamin)
February 22, 2022 Filing 7 CERTIFICATE of interested persons and corporate disclosure statement by Richard Daniels, Jr. (Raslavich, Benjamin)
February 22, 2022 Filing 6 NOTICE of Lead Counsel Designation by Benjamin W. Raslavich on behalf of Richard Daniels, Jr. Lead Counsel: Benjamin W. Raslavich. (Raslavich, Benjamin)
February 22, 2022 Filing 5 NEW CASE ASSIGNED to Judge Virginia M. Hernandez Covington and Magistrate Judge Christopher P. Tuite. New case number: 8:22-cv-0418-VMC-CPT. (SJB)
February 21, 2022 Filing 4 CERTIFICATE of interested persons and corporate disclosure statement by Monarch Recovery Management Inc. identifying Corporate Parent Monarch Recovery Management Inc., Other Affiliate Charles M. Harris, Other Affiliate Trenam Kemker Scharf Barkin Frye ONeill & Mullis, P.A., Other Affiliate Clayton T. Kuhn, Other Affiliate Kuhn Raslavich, P.A., Other Affiliate Richard Daniels, Jr., Other Affiliate Amy L. Drushal, Other Affiliate Benjamin W. Raslavich for Monarch Recovery Management Inc.. (Drushal, Amy)
February 21, 2022 Filing 3 Unopposed MOTION to Stay by Monarch Recovery Management Inc.. (Drushal, Amy)
February 21, 2022 Filing 2 NOTICE of a related action per Local Rule 1.07(c) by Monarch Recovery Management Inc.. Related case(s): Yes (Drushal, Amy)
February 21, 2022 Filing 1 COMPLAINT and NOTICE OF REMOVAL from County Court of Hillsborough County, case number 21-CC-112956 filed in State Court on 11-16-21. Filing fee $402, receipt number AFLMDC-19255957 filed by Monarch Recovery Management Inc. (Attachments: #1 State Court Complaint, #2 State Court Docket Sheet, #3 State Court Other Documents, #4 Civil Cover Sheet)(Drushal, Amy) Modified on 2/22/2022 to correct docket text (BD).

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: Daniels, Jr. v. Monarch Recovery Management, Inc. et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Richard Daniels, Jr.
Represented By: Benjamin W. Raslavich
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: Monarch Recovery Management Inc.
Represented By: Amy Lea Drushal
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: Monarch Recovery Management, Inc.
Represented By: Charles M. Harris, Jr.
Represented By: Amy Lea Drushal
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?