HEBERT et al v. WALLET RECOVERY LTD
| PATRICK HEBERT and BONNIE HEBERT |
| WALLET RECOVERY LTD |
| 5:2013cv00064 |
| February 22, 2013 |
| US District Court for the Middle District of Georgia |
| Macon Office |
| Jones |
| W. Louis Sands |
| Other Statutory Actions |
| 15 U.S.C. ยง 1692 Fair Debt Collection 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
20
ORDER granting in part and denying in part 18 MOTION for Reconsideration re 17 Order on Motion for Default Judgment filed by PATRICK HEBERT, and BONNIE HEBERT. Plaintiffs Motion for Attorneys Fees andSupplemental Memorandum for Attorneys Fe es and Costs (Docs. 13, 18) is GRANTED. Defendant is ORDERED to remit payment of $15,256.34 in attorneys fees and costs, and $1,200 in actual damages, to Plaintiffs within thirty (30) days of entry of this Order. Plaintiffs Motion for Reconsideration (Doc. 18) is GRANTED-IN-PART and DENIED-IN-PART. Judgment shall be entered.Ordered by U.S. District Judge W LOUIS SANDS on 04/24/14 (cma)
|
|
Filing
15
ORDER denying 7 Motion to Set Aside Default; granting 9 Motion to Strike 8 Answer to Complaint and STRIKING Defendant's 8 Answer and all Accompanying Exhibits. Defendant's Answer and Accompanying Exhibits are Hereby Sealed Because they Contain Unredacted Personal Information.Ordered by U.S. District Judge W. Louis Sands on 11/05/13 (cma)
|
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 Georgia 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
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.
