United States of America v. Peikett

United States of America v. Peikett

Plaintiff:	United States of America
Defendant:	Kandi M Peikett
Case Number:	3:2011cv03220
Filed:	July 18, 2011
Court:	US District Court for the Central District of Illinois
Office:	Springfield Office
County:	Adams
Presiding Judge:	Byron G. Cudmore
Presiding Judge:	Sue E. Myerscough
Nature of Suit:	Foreclosure
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 1345
Jury Demanded By:	None

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
April 13, 2012	Filing 18 OPINION CONFIRMING SALE (See Written Opinion): A. The U.S. Marshal's report of the sale is approved and the sale is confirmed; B. A deficiency judgment be and the same is hereby entered in favor of plaintiff, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ACTING THR OUGH RURAL DEVELOPMENT, and against defendant, Kandi M. Peikett nka Kandi Melyssya Ferguson, in personam, in the amount of $42,998.79, and that execution may issue in accordance with the law. C.The U.S. Marshal is directed to issue a deed to the holder of the certificate of purchase, sufficient to convey title pursuant to 735 ILCS 5/l5-l509(a). D.The purchaser of the foreclosed property is hereby given possession effective immediately upon entry of this Order in compliance with 735 ILCS 5/15-1701(c)(1). E. There is no just reason to delay enforcement of or appeal from this final order. Entered by Judge Sue E. Myerscough on 04/13/2012. (VM, ilcd)
October 31, 2011	Filing 11 OPINION ENTERING DEFAULT JUDGMENT: Entered by Judge Sue E. Myerscough on 10/31/11. SEE Written Opinion. (ME, ilcd)

Date Filed

Document Text

April 13, 2012

Filing 18 OPINION CONFIRMING SALE (See Written Opinion): A. The U.S. Marshal's report of the sale is approved and the sale is confirmed; B. A deficiency judgment be and the same is hereby entered in favor of plaintiff, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ACTING THR OUGH RURAL DEVELOPMENT, and against defendant, Kandi M. Peikett nka Kandi Melyssya Ferguson, in personam, in the amount of $42,998.79, and that execution may issue in accordance with the law. C.The U.S. Marshal is directed to issue a deed to the holder of the certificate of purchase, sufficient to convey title pursuant to 735 ILCS 5/l5-l509(a). D.The purchaser of the foreclosed property is hereby given possession effective immediately upon entry of this Order in compliance with 735 ILCS 5/15-1701(c)(1). E. There is no just reason to delay enforcement of or appeal from this final order. Entered by Judge Sue E. Myerscough on 04/13/2012. (VM, ilcd)

October 31, 2011

Filing 11 OPINION ENTERING DEFAULT JUDGMENT: Entered by Judge Sue E. Myerscough on 10/31/11. SEE Written Opinion. (ME, ilcd)

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 Illinois Central District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: United States of America v. Peikett
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: United States of America
Represented By:	Gail Linn Noll
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 ]
Defendant: Kandi M Peikett
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?