Etienne v. Financial Recovery Services, Inc.
Plaintiff: Edwin Etienne
Defendant: Financial Recovery Services of Minnesota, Inc. doing business as Financial Recovery Services, Inc.
Case Number: 0:2021cv61354
Filed: July 1, 2021
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Florida
Presiding Judge: Raag Singhal
Nature of Suit: Consumer Credit
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on August 24, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
August 24, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 12 ORDER OF DISMISSAL re #11 Notice of Voluntary Dismissal with Prejudice. Any pending Motions are DENIED AS MOOT. Case remains Closed. Signed by Judge Raag Singhal on 8/23/2021. See attached document for full details. (jao)
August 24, 2021 Filing 11 NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by Edwin Etienne (Patti, Thomas)
August 3, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 10 ORDER ADMINISTRATIVELY CLOSING CASE re #9 Notice of Pending Settlement. Any pending motions are DENIED AS MOOT. Signed by Judge Raag Singhal on 8/3/2021. See attached document for full details. (jao)
August 2, 2021 Filing 9 NOTICE of Settlement by Edwin Etienne (Patti, Thomas)
July 16, 2021 Filing 8 Notice of Pending, Refiled, Related or Similar Actions by Financial Recovery Services of Minnesota, Inc. (Canter, Ronald)
July 8, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 7 PAPERLESS ORDER granting #6 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Answer to a Complaint or Other Case Initiating Document. Response/Answer due 7/29/2021. Signed by Judge Raag Singhal on 7/8/2021. (eca)
July 8, 2021 Filing 6 Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply/Answer as to #1 Notice of Removal (State Court Complaint), by Financial Recovery Services of Minnesota, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Text of Proposed Order)(Canter, Ronald)
July 1, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 5 Order Requiring Scheduling Report and Certificates of Interested Parties. Signed by Judge Raag Singhal on 7/1/2021. See attached document for full details. (pes)
July 1, 2021 Filing 4 Clerks Notice to Filer re: Electronic Case. Alias Not Added. The Filer failed to add the alias information for the party(ies). The correction was made. It is not necessary to re-file this document. (drz)
July 1, 2021 Filing 3 NOTICE OF COURT PRACTICEUnless otherwise specified by the Court, every motion, legal memorandum, brief, and otherwise shall: be double-spaced, in justified alignment, in 12-point font, using either Times New Roman or Arial typeface. This Notice does not supplant the requirements and provisions of Local Rule 7.1(c). The Court cautions parties against excessive use of footnotes.Multiple Plaintiffs or Defendants shall file joint motions with co-parties unless there are clear conflicts of position. If conflicts of position exist, parties shall explain the conflicts in their separate motions.Parties are encouraged to seek extensions of time in a timely fashion. "A motion for extension of time is not self-executing; no motion is, unless expressly provided for by the applicable rule. Yet, by filing these motions on or near the last day, and then sitting idle pending the Court's disposition of the motion, parties essentially grant their own motion. The Court will not condone this." Compere v. Nusret Miami, LLC, 2020 WL 2844888, at *2 (S.D. Fla. May 7, 2020) (internal citations omitted).Local Rule 16.4, Local Rules for the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, requires that a Notice of Settlement "shall be filed and served jointly by counsel for all parties to the settlement." A unilateral notice of settlement will not stay pre-trial deadlines or hearings.Failure to comply with any of these procedures may result in the imposition of appropriate sanctions. Signed by Judge Raag Singhal on 7/1/2021. (eca)
July 1, 2021 Filing 2 Clerks Notice of Judge Assignment to Judge Raag Singhal. Pursuant to 28 USC 636(c), the parties are hereby notified that the U.S. Magistrate Judge Alicia O. Valle is available to handle any or all proceedings in this case. If agreed, parties should complete and file the Consent form found on our website. It is not necessary to file a document indicating lack of consent. (drz)
July 1, 2021 Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL (STATE COURT COMPLAINT - Edwin Etienne v. Financial Recovery Services of Minnesota, Inc. d/b/a Financial Recovery Services, Inc.) Filing fee $ 402.00 receipt number AFLSDC-14813751, filed by Financial Recovery Services, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Exhibit 1 to Removal, #3 Rule 7.1 Disclosure Statement of Defendant)(Canter, Ronald) Modified Text on 7/1/2021 (drz).(No Answer, Affirmative Defenses or Motion to Dismiss filed in State Court)

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 Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Etienne v. Financial Recovery Services, Inc.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Financial Recovery Services of Minnesota, Inc. doing business as Financial Recovery Services, Inc.
Represented By: Ronald S. Canter
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 ]
Plaintiff: Edwin Etienne
Represented By: Thomas John Patti, III
Represented By: Jibrael Jarallah Said Hindi
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?