Butler v. Federal National Mortgage Association

Plaintiff: William B. Butler
Defendant: Federal National Mortgage Association
Case Number: 0:2012cv02697
Filed: October 22, 2012
Court: Minnesota District Court
County: Hennepin
Referring Judge: Tony N. Leung
Presiding Judge: Susan Richard Nelson
Nature of Suit: Real Property: Foreclosure

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed#Document Text
May 15, 2013 26 Opinion or Order of the Court MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: 1. Defendant's Motion to Dismiss [Doc. No. 8] is GRANTED; and 2. The Complaint [Doc. No. 1-1] is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE (Written Opinion). Signed by Judge Susan Richard Nelson on 5/15/13. (LPH)

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 Minnesota District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Butler v. Federal National Mortgage Association
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: William B. Butler
Represented By: William B Butler
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Federal National Mortgage Association
Represented By: Mark G Schroeder
Represented By: Benjamin E Gurstelle
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 [ 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.