St. Clair v. Capital One Bank (USA), N.A. et al
| James Herbert St. Clair |
| Capital One Bank (USA), N.A. and Minnesota Recovery Bureau, Inc. |
| 0:2012cv01572 |
| June 28, 2012 |
| US District Court for the District of Minnesota |
| DMN Office |
| Anoka |
| Arthur J. Boylan |
| Ann D. Montgomery |
| Consumer Credit |
| 15 U.S.C. ยง 1681 |
| 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
93
FINAL ORDER APPROVING CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT. Granting 83 Motion Final Approval of Class Action Settlement and 87 Motion for Attorney Fees. LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY. (Written Opinion). Signed by Chief Judge Michael J. Davis on 11/14/14. (GRR)
|
|
Filing
51
ORDER. The Court will not adopt that portion of the Report and Recommendation addressing Plaintiff's FCRA claim 39 . IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:1.Defendant Capital One Bank's Motion to Dismiss 3 is GRANTED and that Capital One Bank is dismissed without prejudice from this action. 2. Defendant Minnesota Recovery Bureau, Inc.'s Motion to Dismiss 16 is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART as follows: That the motion is granted with respect to that part of Count I (Violatio ns of the DPPA) asserting violations of 28 U.S.C. § 2722(b) and that the motion otherwise is denied with respect to Count I; and b. That the motion is denied with respect to Count II of Plaintiff's Complaint (Violations of the FCRA).(Written Opinion). Signed by Chief Judge Michael J. Davis on 3/18/13. (GRR)
|
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 Minnesota 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.
