White v. Indymac Bank, FSB et al
Plaintiff: |
Bruce White |
Defendant: |
Indymac Bank, FSB, Onewest Bank, FSB and Does 1 through 20 inclusive |
Case Number: |
1:2009cv00571 |
Filed: |
December 7, 2009 |
Court: |
US District Court for the District of Hawaii |
Office: |
Hawaii Office |
County: |
Honolulu |
Presiding Judge: |
KEVIN S.C. CHANG |
Presiding Judge: |
DAVID ALAN EZRA |
Nature of Suit: |
Plaintiff |
Cause of Action: |
15 U.S.C. § 1601 Truth in Lending |
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 20, 2012 |
Filing
229
ORDER: (1) GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 209 AND (2) DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 208 . Signed by JUDGE DAVID ALAN EZRA on 3/20/2012. Excerpt of Conclusion: ~ &qu ot;The April 10, 2012 trial date is hereby VACATED and all pending Motions in Limine (docs. ## 182-186) are DENIED AS MOOT." ~ Order terminates Motions in Limine, doc nos. 182 , 183 , 184 , 185 , 186 . < font size=3> (afc)CERTIFICATE OF SERVICEParticipants registered to receive electronic notifications received this document electronically at the e-mail address listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF). Participants not registered to receive electronic notifications will be served by first class mail on March 21, 2012.
|
January 18, 2012 |
Filing
188
ORDER: (1) Denying Without Prejudice 150 Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment and (2) Denying Plaintiff's Request for a TRO or Preliminary Injunction. Signed by JUDGE DAVID ALAN EZRA on 1/18/2012. (gab, )CERTIF ICATE OF SERVICEParticipants registered to receive electronic notifications received this document electronically at the e-mail address listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF). Participants not registered to receive electronic notifications were served by first class mail on the date of this docket entry
|
September 14, 2011 |
Filing
125
ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION 124 . Signed by JUDGE DAVID ALAN EZRA on 9/14/2011. [Order Adopts Findings and Recommendation to Deny Plaintiff's Motion for Default Judgment] (afc) CERTIFICATE OF SERVICEParticipants registered to receive electronic notifications received this document electronically at the e-mail address listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF). Participants not registered to receive electronic notifications will be served by first class mail on September 15, 2011.
|
April 18, 2011 |
Filing
97
ORDER: (1) SUA SPONTE DISMISSING PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT; (2) DENYING AS MOOT ONEWEST'S 34 MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; (3) DENYING AS MOOT PLAINTIFF'S 38 MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; AND (4) DENYING AS MOOT ONEWEST'S SECOND [77 ] MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT: "For the reasons stated above, the Court sua sponte DISMISSES Plaintiff's Complaint with Leave to Amend Plaintiff's claims other than TILA rescission, declaratory judgment, injunctive relief, and pu nitive damages, as outlined above. Additionally, the Court DENIES AS MOOT OneWest's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. # 34 ), Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. # 38 ), and OneWest's Second Motion for Summary Judgment (D oc. # 77). IT IS SO ORDERED.". Signed by District JUDGE DAVID ALAN EZRA on April 18, 2011. (bbb, )CERTIFICATE OF SERVICEParticipants registered to receive electronic notifications received this document electronically at the e-mail address listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF). Participants not registered to receive electronic notifications were served by first class mail on the date of this docket entry
|
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 Hawaii 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?