David et al v. Leibert et al
| Remnant David, Oclean Trust, Betty J Wilson and Darrell C Wilson |
| McCalla Raymer Leibert, Marian E Perkins, Reed Smith LLP, Colette Wiler and Joshua Emberton |
| 1:2025cv04418 |
| April 23, 2025 |
| U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| Edmond E Chang |
| Racketeer/Corrupt Organization |
| 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 30, 2026. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 72
DOCUMENT by Remnant David, Oclean Trust, Betty J Wilson, Darrell C Wilson.(Received via Pro se portal 10/16/25) (nsf, )
|
|
Filing 71
MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Additional time is required to examine the various filings, including the motions #10 , #14 to dismiss. The tracking status hearing of 10/10/2025 is reset to 11/21/2025 at 8:30 a.m., but to track the case only (no appearance is required, the case will not be called). Emailed and mailed notice (mw, )
|
|
Filing 70
EXHIBIT C by Remnant David, Oclean Trust. (Received via pro se online portal on 09/30/2025.) (daj, )
|
|
Filing 69
EXHIBIT B by Remnant David, Oclean Trust. (Received via pro se online portal on 09/30/2025.) (daj, )
|
|
Filing 68
OBJECTION to denial of summary judgment, motion for reconsideration, and renewed request for judicial determination or, in the alternative, for court-ordered settlement conference by Plaintiffs Remnant David and Oclean Trust. (Received via pro se online portal on 09/30/2025.) (daj, )
|
|
Filing 67
LETTER from Darrell WIlson dated 9/16/2025. (Exhibits). (Envelope postmarked 9/19/2025). (Received by mail in the Clerk's Office on 9/24/2025). (jn,)
|
|
Filing 66
Letter of Intent to the U.S. Attorney General by Plaintiffs (Received via pro se online portal on 9/19/25.) (Attachments: #1 Certified Mail)(jxm, )
|
|
Filing 65
NOTICE of Correction regarding certificate of service #58 (jxm, )
|
|
Filing 64
NOTIFICATION of Docket Entry by Honorable Edmond E. Chang by Plaintiffs (Received via pro se online portal on 9/19/25.) (Attachments: #1 Notification of Docket Entry by Edmond E. Chang )(jxm, )
|
|
Filing 63
EXHIBIT by Plaintiffs (Received via pro se online portal on 9/19/25.) (Attachments: #1 Exhibit AAA)(jxm, )
|
|
Filing 62
EXHIBIT by Plaintiffs (Received via pro se online portal on 9/19/25.) (Attachments: #1 Exhibit D)(jxm, )
|
|
Filing 61
EXHIBIT by Plaintiffs (Received via pro se online portal on 9/19/25.) (Attachments: #1 Exhibit C)(jxm, )
|
|
Filing 60
EXHIBIT by Plaintiffs (Received via pro se online portal on 9/19/25.) (Attachments: #1 Exhibit B)(jxm, )
|
|
Filing 59
EXHIBIT by Plaintiffs (Received via pro se online portal on 9/19/25.) (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A)(jxm, )
|
|
Filing 58
Entered in error.
|
|
Filing 57
MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: The Plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment or settlement conference #56 is denied. The motion contains no grounds. In any event, there are pending motions to dismiss, and the Court does not usually require a party to attend a settlement conference unless there is mutual agreement. Mailed notice (mw, )
|
|
Filing 56
MOTION by Plaintiffs Betty J Wilson, Oclean Trust, Remnant David, Darrell C Wilson for summary judgment respectfully renew their request for summary judgment or alternatively-mandatory settlement conference. (Received via pro se email on 9/2/2025). (jn,)
|
|
Filing 55
REPLY by Plaintiffs Remnant David, Oclean Trust, Betty J Wilson, Darrell C Wilson in support of notice of summary default, request for judicial determination, and motion for summary judgment or, in the alternative, for mandatory settlement conference. (Received via pro se email on 9/2/2025). (jn,)
|
|
Filing 54
RESPONSE by Joshua Emberton, McCalla Raymer Leibertin Opposition to MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM by Defendants Reed Smith LLP, Colette Wiler #10 (O'malley, Michael)
|
|
Filing 53
EXHIBIT D on Going and Irreparable harm (Update) (Attachments: #1 Exhibit)(jxm, )
|
|
Filing 52
MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: On review of the docket, the Plaintiffs posted a filing labelled Exhibit D, R. #49 , but it contains a personal identifier barred by Civil Rule 5.2(a)(2) (date of birth). The Plaintiffs shall file a publicly available redacted version of R. #49 , redacting (that is, removing) the month and date of birth as required by the rule. The redacted version is due by 08/22/2025. And the Plaintiffs must carefully follow that rule, and all rules, going forward. The Clerk's Office shall place R. #49 under seal. Mailed notice. (jn,)
|
|
Filing 51
EXHIBIT E by Plaintiffs Betty J Wilson, Darrell C Wilson. (Received via pro se online portal on 08/15/2025) (vkm, )
|
|
Filing 50
EXHIBIT F by Plaintiffs Betty J Wilson, Darrell C Wilson. (Received via pro se online portal on 08/13/2025) (rc, )
|
|
Filing 49
EXHIBIT D by Plaintiffs Betty J Wilson, Darrell C Wilson. (Received via pro se online portal on 08/13/2025) (rc, )
|
|
Filing 48
EXHIBIT C by Plaintiffs Betty J Wilson, Darrell C Wilson. (Received via pro se online portal on 08/13/2025) (rc, )
|
|
Filing 47
EXHIBIT B by Plaintiffs Betty J Wilson, Darrell C Wilson. (Received via pro se online portal on 08/13/2025) (rc, )
|
|
Filing 46
EXHIBIT A by Plaintiffs Betty J Wilson, Darrell C Wilson. (Received via pro se online portal on 08/13/2025) (rc, )
|
|
Filing 45
NOTICE by Betty J Wilson, Darrell C Wilson for summary default, request for judicial determination. (Received via pro se online portal on 08/13/2025) (rc, )
|
|
Filing 43
MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: As best as can be discerned, the motion 10 to dismiss filed by Reed Smith and Colette Willer and the motion #14 to dismiss filed by Defendants McCalla Raymer (the law firm) and Joshua Emberton (the individual) are fully briefed. The tracking status hearing of 07/25/2025 is reset to 10/10/2025 at 8:30 a.m., but to track the case only (no appearance is required, the case will not be called). Mailed notice (mjc, )
|
|
Filing 44
CONSTITUTIONAL Questions raised under Federal Rule Civil Procedure 5.1 by Darrell C Wilson. (Envelope postmark 7/14/2025). (Received by mail in the Clerk's Office on 7/23/2025). (jn, ) Modified on 7/25/2025 (jn, ).
|
|
Filing 42
NOTICE by Darrell C Wilson of constitutional challenge (Received via pro se online portal on 7/15/2025) (vjd, )
|
|
Filing 41
CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTIONS RAISED UNDER FEDERAL RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE by Darrell C Wilson (Received via pro se online portal on 7/15/2025) (vjd, )
|
|
Filing 40
STATEMENT of Facts regarding the inclusion of Reed Smith & Colette M. Willer as Defendant in Federal Case by Betty J Wilson, Darrell C Wilson. (Received via pro se email on 7/7/2025). (jn,)
|
|
Filing 39
REED SMITH LLP EXHIBIT C by Plaintiffs Betty J Wilson, Darrell C Wilson. (Exhibits). (Received via pro se email on 7/7/2025). (jn,)
|
|
Filing 38
RRED SMITH LLP EXHIBIT B by Plaintiffs Betty J Wilson, Darrell C Wilson. (Exhibits). (Received via pro se email on 7/7/2025). (jn,)
|
|
Filing 37
EXHIBIT A by Plaintiffs Darrell Wilson and Betty J. Wilson. (Exhibits). (Received via pro se email on 7/7/2025). (jn,) Modified on 7/8/2025 (jn, ). Modified on 7/8/2025 (jn, ).
|
|
Filing 36
MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: R. 35 is terminated as a motion on CM/ECF. There is no discernible text that explains what the motion is seeking. Emailed and mailed notice (mw, )
|
|
Filing 34
MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: (1.) On review of the Plaintiff's motion #29 to amend complaint, the motion is denied without prejudice for now. A fully briefed motion to dismiss is pending, so an amendment is not appropriate right now. Depending on the outcome of the motion to dismiss, the Court will consider (as it always does) whether or not the dismissal should be followed by a chance to amend the complaint. (2.) On the motion #14 to dismiss filed by Defendants McCalla Raymer (the law firm) and Joshua Emberton (the individual), the Plaintiffs' response is due by 07/14/2025. The defense reply is due by 07/21/2025. For now, the tracking status hearing of 07/25/2025 remains in place, but to track the case only (no appearance is required, the case will not be called). Emailed and Mailed notice (mw, )
|
|
Filing 33
STATEMENT by Betty J Wilson, Darrell C Wilson. (Received via Box.com on 06/27/25) (aee, )
|
|
Filing 32
OBJECTION to defendants' notice of motion by Plaintiffs Betty J Wilson, Darrell C Wilson. (Received via Box.com on 06/27/25) (aee, )
|
|
Filing 35
"WITHIN the Admiralty" MOTION by Plaintiffs Remnant David, Betty J Wilson to amend Exhibit A. (Received via pro se email on 6/26/2025). (jn,)
|
|
Filing 31
NOTICE of intent to Amend Complaint-David v Leibert et a; (Case No, 1:25-cv-04418 by Remnant David, Darrell C Wilson. (Received via Box.com on 06/26/25) (aee, )
|
|
Filing 30
STATEMENT by Betty J Wilson, Darrell C Wilson. (Received via Box.com on 06/26/25) (aee, )
|
|
Filing 29
MOTION by Plaintiffs Betty J Wilson, Darrell C Wilson for leave to amend complaint. (Received via Box.com on 06/26/25) (aee, )
|
|
Filing 28
NOTICE of Motion by Michael J O'malley, Secon for presentment of motion to dismiss #14 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 7/2/2025 at 08:00 AM. (O'malley, Michael)
|
|
Filing 27
REPLY by Defendants Reed Smith LLP, Colette Wiler to Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim #10 (DeGrande, Kristen)
|
|
Filing 26
MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: The filings are under advisement. The tracking status hearing of 06/27/2025 is reset to 07/25/2025 at 8:30 a.m., but to track the case only (no appearance is required, the case will not be called). Mailed notice (mw, )
|
|
Filing 25
MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: The Plaintiffs' motion #22 for TRO is denied. The Plaintiffs say that an eviction notice was delivered to the residence that they occupy and they ask this Court to stop the eviction. The Plaintiffs filed a copy of the notice. R. 23. Not surprisingly, the notice is from the Office of the Cook County Sheriff and, in its first sentence, refers to the eviction order approved by a state court judge. As pointed out in a prior order of this Court, R. 16, under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine, Mains v. Citibank, 852 F.3d 669, 675 (7th Cir. 2017), this lower federal court has no subject matter jurisdiction to undo a state court order like this. The relief against the eviction order must be sought in state court, not in a lower federal court. The motion is denied. Mailed notice (mw, )
|
|
Filing 24
EXHIBIT B Summons Exhibit 2025A by Darrell C Wilson (Received at the Intake Counter on 6/12/2025) (vjd, )
|
|
Filing 23
EXHIBIT A- Eviction Unit by Darrell C Wilson (Received at the Intake Counter on 6/12/2025) (vjd, )
|
|
Filing 22
EMERGENCY MOTION by Plaintiff Darrell C Wilson for temporary retraining order and declaratory relief (Received at the Intake Counter on 6/12/2025) (vjd, )
|
|
Filing 21
WAIVER OF SERVICE returned executed as to Marian E Perkins waiver sent on 5/30/2025, answer due 7/29/2025. (Received via pro se online portal on 06/09/2025.) (daj, )
|
|
Filing 20
NOTICE by Betty J Wilson, Darrell C Wilson of filing #19 . (rc, )
|
|
Filing 19
RESPONSE by Plaintiffs Betty J Wilson, Darrell C Wilson to order to show cause and opposition to defendants' motion to dismiss. (Received via pro se online portal on 06/02/2025) (rc, )
|
|
Filing 18
PLAINTIFFS' OPPOSITION to Defendants' motion to dismiss affidavit of fact and law supporting opposition to motion to dismiss by Remnant David, Oclean Trust, Betty J Wilson. (Attachments: #1 Notice of Filing) (Received via pro se email on 5/23/2025). (jn,) Modified on 5/27/2025 (jn, ).
|
|
Filing 17
EXHIBIT copy of (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Attachment B)(jxm, )
|
|
Filing 16
MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: (1.) On the motion to dismiss filed by Reed Smith and Colette Willer, the Plaintiffs' response is due by 06/12/2025. The defense reply is due by 06/26/2025. (2.) On review of the complaint, R. #1 , the Court issues a rule to show cause for the Plaintiffs explain why the claims against the state court judge, Marian Perkins, should not be dismissed (as to damages claims) under the doctrine of absolute judicial immunity, Mireles v. Waco, 502 U.S. 9, 11-12 (1991), and (as to injunctive relief) under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine, Mains v. Citibank, 852 F.3d 669, 675 (7th Cir. 2017). The Plaintiffs' response to the show-cause order is due by 06/05/2025. (3.) On review of the affidavit of service as to Marian Perkins, R. 6 at 2, it is not clear that substitute personal service at a workplace (rather than abode) is proper as to an individual. Rather than require re-service right now, however, the Court staff will alert the Cook County State's Attorney's Office on whether there is a record of service of process as to that defendant. (4.) The tracking status hearing of 05/30/2025 is reset to 06/27/2025 at 8:30 a.m., but to track the case only (no appearance is required, the case will not be called). No joint initial status report is due for now. Discovery is stayed until a decision on the dismissal motion. Mailed notice. (jn,)
|
|
Filing 15
MEMORANDUM by Joshua Emberton, McCalla Raymer Leibert in support of motion to dismiss #14 Motion to Dismiss Complaint (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Complaint to Foreclosure Mortgage, #2 Exhibit MSJ, #3 Exhibit Order of Denial, #4 Exhibit Order of Denial, #5 Exhibit Order of Denial, #6 Exhibit Motion for Judgment of Foreclosure and Sale, #7 Exhibit Judgement for Foreclosure and Sale, #8 Exhibit Motion for Equity, #9 Exhibit Order of Denial, #10 Exhibit MSJ, #11 Exhibit MSJ, #12 Exhibit Order, #13 Exhibit Amended Complaint, #14 Exhibit Order, #15 Exhibit Second Amended Complaint, #16 Exhibit Order, #17 Exhibit Judgment for Defendants)(O'malley, Michael)
|
|
Filing 14
MOTION by Defendants Joshua Emberton, McCalla Raymer Leibert to dismiss Motion to Dismiss Complaint (O'malley, Michael)
|
|
Filing 13
ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendants Joshua Emberton, McCalla Raymer Leibert by Michael J O'malley, Secon (O'malley, Michael)
|
|
Filing 12
NOTICE of Motion by Kristen DeGrande for presentment of Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim #10 before Honorable Edmond E. Chang on 5/21/2025 at 08:30 AM. (DeGrande, Kristen)
|
|
Filing 11
MEMORANDUM by Reed Smith LLP, Colette Wiler in support of Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim #10 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit C, #4 Exhibit D, #5 Exhibit E)(DeGrande, Kristen)
|
|
Filing 10
MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM by Defendants Reed Smith LLP, Colette Wiler (DeGrande, Kristen)
|
|
Filing 9
ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendants Reed Smith LLP, Colette Wiler by Kristen DeGrande (DeGrande, Kristen)
|
|
Filing 8
INITIAL STATUS Report by Plaintiffs. (Received by Box.Com on 5/9/25). (gcy, )
|
|
Filing 7
MINUTE entry before the Honorable Edmond E. Chang: Initial tracking status hearing set for 05/30/2025 at 8:30 a.m. to track the case only (no appearance is required, the case will not be called). Instead, the Court will set the case schedule after reviewing the written status report. The parties must file a joint initial status report with the content described in the ***ATTACHED*** status report requirements (do ***not*** use templates from other cases) by 05/21/2025. Plaintiffs must still file the report even if Defendants have not responded to requests to craft a joint report. If not all Defendants have been served, then Plaintiffs must complete the part of the report on the progress of service. Also, counsel (or the parties, if proceeding pro se) must carefully review Judge Chang's Case Management Procedures, available online at ilnd.uscourts.gov (navigate to Judges / District Judges / Judge Edmond E. Chang). Because the Procedures are occasionally revised, counsel (or the party, if proceeding pro se) must read them anew even if the counsel or the party has appeared before Judge Chang in other cases. Emailed notice (Attachments: #1 Status Report Requirements) (mw, )
|
|
Filing 6
SUMMONS Returned Executed as to Joshua Emberton on 4/25/2025, answer due 5/16/2025; Marian E Perkins on 4/25/2025, answer due 5/16/2025; Colette Wiler on 4/25/2025, answer due 5/16/2025. Received At The Intake Counter On 4/28/25 (pg, )
|
|
Filing 5
SUMMONS Issued (Court Participant) as to Defendants Joshua Emberton, Marian E Perkins, Reed Smith LLP (Attachments: #1 Summons, #2 Summons)(bi, )
|
|
CLERK'S NOTICE: Pursuant to Local Rule 73.1(b), a United States Magistrate Judge of this court is available to conduct all proceedings in this civil action. If all parties consent to have the currently assigned United States Magistrate Judge conduct all proceedings in this case, including trial, the entry of final judgment, and all post-trial proceedings, all parties must sign their names on the attached #Consent To# form. This consent form is eligible for filing only if executed by all parties. The parties can also express their consent to jurisdiction by a magistrate judge in any joint filing, including the Joint Initial Status Report or proposed Case Management Order. (vkm, )
|
|
Filing 3
PRO SE Appearance by Plaintiff Betty J Wilson. (Received at the Intake Counter on 4/23/25.) (vkm, )
|
|
Filing 2
CIVIL Cover Sheet. (Received at the Intake Counter on 4/23/25.) (vkm, )
|
|
Filing 1
COMPLAINT filed by Betty J Wilson; Jury Demand. (Exhibits) (Attachments: #1 Exhibit, #2 Exhibit, #3 Exhibit) (Received at the Intake Counter on 4/23/25.) (vkm, )
|
|
CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Edmond E. Chang. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Daniel P. McLaughlin. Case assignment: Random assignment. (Civil Category 2). (vkm, )
|
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Illinois Northern 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.
