Cavaco v. Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. et al
Carla Louise Cavaco |
Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., Freemont Investment and Loan, Wilshire Credit Corporation, HSBC Bank USA, National Association as Trust for the Ellington Trust Series 2007-1 and Does 1 through 20 inclusive |
1:2009cv00586 |
December 11, 2009 |
US District Court for the District of Hawaii |
Hawaii Office |
Honolulu |
BARRY M. KURREN |
SUSAN OKI MOLLWAY |
Real Property: Foreclosure |
15 U.S.C. ยง 1640 Truth in Lending |
Plaintiff |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 44 ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 31 - Signed by CHIEF JUDGE SUSAN OKI MOLLWAY on 4/25/11. ("Except with respect to the TILA rescission claim asserted in Count 1, summary judgment is granted i n Defendant's favor. With respect to the TILA rescission claim asserted in Count 1, the court orders the parties to immediately meet and confer about how this count should proceed in light of Cavaco's ability or inability to unwind the tran saction.") (emt, )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 |
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
- 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.