RICHARDS v. PAR, INC. et al
| NICHOLE L. RICHARDS |
| LAWRENCE TOWING, LLC and PAR, INC. |
| 1:2017cv00409 |
| February 9, 2017 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana |
| Indianapolis Office |
| Matthew P. Brookman |
| Tanya Walton Pratt |
| Consumer Credit |
| 15 U.S.C. ยง 1692 Fair Debt Collection Act |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
173
ORDER ON PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR AWARD OF ADDITIONAL DAMAGES AND MOTION FOR ATTORNEY'S FEES AND COSTS - This matter is before the Court on a Motion for Award of Additional Damages (Filing No. 138 ) and a Motion for Attorney's Fees and Costs (Filing No. 140 ), filed by Plaintiff Nicole L. Richards. Following a jury trial in which she was awarded damages against Defendants PAR, Inc. and Lawrence Towing, LLC for violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and Indiana's Crime Victims Relief Act, Richards filed these motions. Richards' Motion for Award of Additional Damages (Filing No. 138 ) is DENIED, and Richards' Motion for Attorney's Fees and Costs (Filing No. 140 ) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. Richards is awarded attorneys' fees and costs in the amount of $243,404.89 against Defendants. Plaintiff's Motion to Compel (Filing No. 155 ) is DENIED as moot. In this entry, the Court has issued rulings on Plaintiff' ;s Motions for additional damages, attorney's fees and costs. Billing entries and records from Defendants' counsel are not relevant or necessary for the Court to rule on Plaintiff's Motions. (See Order). Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 8/16/2022. (AKH).
|
|
Filing
117
ORDER ON PLAINTIFF'S SUPPLEMENTAL 112 MOTION IN LIMINE - This matter is before the Court on a Supplemental Motion in Limine filed by Plaintiff Nichole L. Richards near the eve of trial (Filing No. 112 ). Richards initiated this lawsuit in 2017 alleging violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and the Indiana Crime Victims Relief Act after Defendants PAR, Inc. and Lawrence Towing, LLC repossessed her vehicle for which she defaulted on payment. This matter is schedu led for a jury trial on November 1, 2021. The Court DENIES Richards' Supplemental Motion in Limine (Filing No. 112 ). An order in limine is not a final, appealable order. If the parties believe that specific evidence excluded by this Order becomes relevant or otherwise admissible during trial, counsel may request a hearing outside the presence of the jury. Likewise, if the parties believe that specific evidence is inadmissible during trial, counsel may raise specific objections to that evidence. (See Order). Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 10/29/2021. (AKH)
|
|
Filing
111
ORDER granting in part and denying in part 103 Motion to Exclude Plaintiff's Trial Exhibits. ***SEE ORDER FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION*** Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 10/14/2021. (JDC)
|
|
Filing
108
ENTRY ON MOTIONS IN LIMINE - For the foregoing reasons, the Court GRANTS in part and DENIES in part Richards' Motion in Limine (Filing No. 92), and GRANTS in part and DENIES in part Defendants' Motion in Limine (Filing No. 95). An order in limine is not a final, appealable order. If the parties believe that specific evidence excluded by this Order becomes relevant or otherwise admissible during trial, counsel may approach the bench and request a hearing outside the presence of the jury. Likewise, if the parties believe that specific evidence is inadmissible during trial, counsel may raise specific objections to that evidence. ***SEE ENTRY FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION*** Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 10/13/2021. (JDC)
|
|
Filing
60
ENTRY ON RICHARDS' 55 MOTION TO RECONSIDER - In accordance with Beler, this Court will not use the "ambulatory language" of the FDCPA "to displace decisions consciously made by state legislatures and courts" about how cr editors collect debts under state law. Thus, the Court denies Richards' Motion to Reconsider on these grounds. If Defendants disregarded their contractual obligations by breaching the peace, Richards has a state claim for breach of contract, not a federal claim under the FDCPA. For that reason, the Court denies her Motion to Reconsider on this second ground. For the foregoing reasons, Richards' Motion to Reconsider pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) (Filing No. 55 ) is DENIED. (See Entry.) Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 12/27/2018. (NAD)
|
|
Filing
53
ENTRY ON PENDING MOTIONS - Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (Filing No. 36 ) is GRANTED on the federal claim asserted by Richards. The Court declines supplemental jurisdiction over the state law claims and those claims are dismissed w ithout prejudice. The Defendants' Motion to Stay Arbitration is DENIED. (Filing No. [43)]. Huntington's Motion to Intervene (Filing No. 47 ) is DENIED, and Huntington is terminated as an intervenor in this action. The Clerk is directed to remove Huntington as a defendant in the caption, as they were never a named party. The Court will issue Final Judgment under separate order. (See Entry.) Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 7/16/2018. (NAD)
|
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 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.
