Steamboat Ventures, Ltd. et al v. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
Plaintiff: |
Prime Pacific Capital, LLC, Village Commercial Group, LLC, Steamboat Ventures, Ltd. and Stuart Market Project, LLC |
Defendant: |
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation |
Counter Defendant: |
Steamboat Ventures, Ltd. |
Counter Claimant: |
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation |
Case Number: |
1:2009cv01399 |
Filed: |
May 26, 2009 |
Court: |
US District Court for the Northern District of Georgia |
Office: |
Atlanta Office |
County: |
XX US, Outside State |
Presiding Judge: |
Forrester |
Nature of Suit: |
Contract: Other |
Cause of Action: |
12 U.S.C. § 1819 Default of Promissory Note |
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 30, 2010 |
Filing
52
OPINION and ORDER. The court WITHDRAWS Steamboat Venture's 43 motion to deposit funds into the registry of the court; GRANTS Stuart Market's 47 motion to dismiss; and GRANTS the 50 consent motion to dismiss certain claims by the FDIC , Steamboat Ventures, Village Commercial Group, LLC, and Prime Pacific Capital, LLC. The court DISMISSES WITH PREJUDICE Plaintiffs Steamboat Ventures Ltd.,Village Commercial Group, LLC and Prime Pacific Capital's complaint against Defendant Fede ral Deposit Insurance Corporation as Receiver for Integrity Bank. The court DISMISSES WITHOUT PREJUDICE Defendant Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation as Receiver for Integrity Bank's claims against Plaintiff Steamboat Ventures, Ltd. The court DISMISSES WITHOUT PREJUDICE Stuart Market's claims against Steamboat Ventures. It appears to the court that the Intervenor Complaint Stuart Market filed against the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation as Receiver for Integrity Bank is the only claim that remains pending. The parties are DIRECTED to file a SCHEDULING ORDER on the remaining issues within 30 days of the date of this order. Signed by Judge J. Owen Forrester on 3/30/10. (bse)
|
January 15, 2010 |
Filing
41
OPINION and ORDER. The court GRANTS IN PART Defendant's 17 motion to stay pending exhaustion of administrative remedies; GRANTS IN PART AND DENIES IN PART Defendant FDIC-R's 38 motion for clarification; GRANTS Plaintiff Stuart Market&# 039;s 39 motion for telephonic status conference; and GRANTS Plaintiff Stuart Market's 40 motion to supplement. The court will hold a telephone conference with the parties on Monday, 2/1/10 at 11:00 a.m. Signed by Judge J. Owen Forrester on 1/15/10. (bse)
|
December 8, 2009 |
Filing
37
ORDER re: issue of whether the FDIC-R has any lien rights to the Commercial Unit. Many legal issues remain in the complaint and counterclaim. The Court DIRECTS the parties to file motions for summary judgment on the remaining claims by 2/1/10. Signed by Judge J. Owen Forrester on 12/8/09. (bse)
|
October 28, 2009 |
Filing
29
OPINION and ORDER granting 28 Joint Motion to Stay and Motion for Hearing. The court DIRECTS all parties to appear in Courtroom 1905 on Friday, November 6, 2009 at 10:30 a.m. for a conference in this case. The court DIRECTS that in addition to cou nsel for the FDIC-R, the FDIC-R have an individual representative with authority to bind the FDIC-R appear in person at the conference. The court holds in abeyance the FDIC-Rs motion to stay pending exhaustion of administrative remedies 17 until the time of the conference. Until the conference, the court DIRECTS the FDIC-R not to initiate foreclosure proceedings on the instant property. Signed by Judge J. Owen Forrester on 10/28/09. (bse)
|
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 Georgia Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
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?