ASHACK v. CALIBER HOME LOANS, INC.
Plaintiff: REBECCA ASHACK
Defendant: CALIBER HOME LOANS, INC.
Case Number: 1:2015cv01069
Filed: July 9, 2015
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana
Office: Indianapolis Office
Presiding Judge: Debra McVicker Lynch
Presiding Judge: Jane Magnus-Stinson
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 15 U.S.C. ยง 1692 Fair Debt Collection Act
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
June 16, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 98 ORDER - Plaintiff Rebecca Ashack, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, asserts claims in this action against Defendant Caliber Home Loans, Inc. ("Caliber") under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, 47 U.S.C. &# 167; 227 (the "TCPA"). Specifically, Ms. Ashack alleges that Caliber placed telephone calls to her cellular telephone, and the cellular telephones of class members, using an automatic telephone system, or autodialer. On January 24, 2017, after the parties had conducted discovery and participated in a private mediation, the Court granted the parties' Motion for Preliminary Approval of Settlement Class, and certified the settlement class detailed in this Order. On March 6, 201 7, David Tharp sent an Objection to the settlement to the Claims Administrator. He also testified at the May 31, 2017 hearing, and described the telephone calls he received from Caliber. For the reasons stated in this Order, the Court OVERRULES AS MOOT Mr. Tharp's Objection to the class action settlement, GRANTS Plaintiff's Unopposed Motion for Final Approval of Class Settlement, [Filing No. 93 ], and GRANTS Plaintiff's Motion for Attorneys' Fees, Costs and Service Awa rds, [Filing No. 86 ], to the extent that Plaintiff's counsel is awarded $783,000 in attorneys' fees and $29,060.73 in costs,4 and a service award of $4,500 is approved for Ms. Ashack, all to be paid from the $2,895, 000 settlement fund. This matter is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE and without fees, costs or disbursements to any party, except as provided in the Settlement Agreement as to Plaintiff's counsel's fees and costs and the service award to Ms. Ashack. Final judgment shall enter accordingly. (See Order). Copies pursuant to Distribution List. Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 6/16/2017. (APD)
January 24, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 85 ORDER granting 81 Motion for Preliminary Approval of Settlement Class - The Final Approval Hearing is scheduled for May 31, 2017 at 10:00 a.m. in Room 307, United States Courthouse, 46 E. Ohio Street, Indianapolis, Indiana. SEE ORDER. Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 1/24/2017.(JRB)
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 Indiana Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: ASHACK v. CALIBER HOME LOANS, INC.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: REBECCA ASHACK
Represented By: Jennifer Rust Murray
Represented By: Mary B. Reiten
Represented By: Syed Ali Saeed
Represented By: Beth E. Terrell
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: CALIBER HOME LOANS, INC.
Represented By: Michael H. Gottschlich
Represented By: Edward M. Smid
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?