Thomas v. Select Portfolio Servicing Inc et al
1:2006cv00401 |
December 18, 2006 |
US District Court for the Northern District of Indiana |
Fort Wayne Office |
Roger B Cosbey |
Philip P Simon |
Civil Rights: Other |
42 U.S.C. ยง 1981 Civil Rights |
None |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 119 OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING Defendants' Motions for Summary Judgment [DE 94, DE 97]. Thomas' Motion for Summary Judgment [DE 86] is DENIED. All other pending motions in this case are DENIED AS MOOT. Thomas' infliction of emotional distr ess claims against Defendant Sara Reid are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. All other claims are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. The Court further VACATES all pending deadlines and settings in this matter and DIRECTS the Clerk to treat this case as TERMINATED. Signed by Judge Philip P Simon 9/4/09. (jcp) |
Filing 78 OPINION AND ORDER DENYING 77 MOTION to Compel PLAINTIFF'S RULE 26 DISCLOSURES filed by Select Portfolio Servicing Inc, Bank of America. Parties to file and serve Rule 26(a)(1)(A) initial disclosures on/bf 2/12/09. Clerk DIRECTED to send a copy of Rule 26 to pltf at his last known address. Signed by Magistrate Judge Roger B Cosbey on 1/29/09. (jcp) |
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 Indiana 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
Search for this case: Thomas v. Select Portfolio Servicing Inc et al | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | 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.