Kruckow v. Merchants Bank et al
| Dana D Kruckow |
| Merchants Bank, Rushford State Bank, Craig Schroeder and Paul A Kruckow |
| 0:2016cv02418 |
| July 15, 2016 |
| US District Court for the District of Minnesota |
| DMN Office |
| Houston |
| Donovan W. Frank |
| David T. Schultz |
| 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
105
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER. 1. Plaintiff's Motion to Reconsider (Doc. No. 101 ) is GRANTED. 2. Consistent with this Order, the Court vacates its prior Memorandum Opinion and Order to the extent that it dismissed Plaintiffs claims for violating FCRA, invasion of privacy, vicarious liability, and civil conspiracy for the November 8, 2013 report. (Written Opinion) Signed by Judge Donovan W. Frank on 12/01/2017. (BJS)
|
|
Filing
100
ORDER. Plaintiff's request for leave to file a motion for reconsideration (Doc. No. 90 ) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as follows: 1. Plaintiff may file a motion for reconsideration consistent with this order. 2. Plaintiff and Defendant s Rushford State Bank and Schroeder shall meet and confer on a briefing schedule. The briefs shall not exceed 10 pages. 3. If the Court determines a hearing is necessary, then it will contact the parties to schedule such a hearing. 4. The Court respectfully denies the remainder of Plaintiffs request to file a motion for reconsideration. (Written Opinion). Signed by Judge Donovan W. Frank on 9/14/2017. (BJS)
|
|
Filing
83
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER. 1. Merchants Bank's Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 45 ) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as follows: a. Merchants Bank's Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Subject Matter jurisdiction is DENIED. b. Merchants Ban k's Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim is GRANTED. c. Plaintiff's Amended Complaint (Doc. No. 35 ) is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE to the extent that it brought claims against Merchants Bank. d. Merchants Bank is DISMISSED as a par ty to this action. 2. Paul Kruckow's Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 50 ), Rushford State Bank's Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 58 ), and Craig Schroeder's Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 62 ) are GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as follows: a. The Motions to Dismiss for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction are DENIED. b. The Motions to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim are GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. Consistent with the Court's Memorandum Opinion, the Court DISMISSES WIT H PREJUDICE claims in the Amended Complaint (Doc. No. 35 ) as follows: i. Count I-FCRA Violation-against Defendants Paul Kruckow, Schroeder, and Rushford State Bank for the February and November 2013 credit reports. ii. Count II-Invasion of Privacy- against Schroeder and Rushford State Bank for the February and November 2013 credit reports and for issuing the loans. iii. Count IV-Civil Conspiracy-against Defendants Paul Kruckow, Schroeder, and Rushford State Bank to the extent that the Court has dismissed the underlying claims. iv. Count V-Negligence-against Defendants Schroeder and Rushford State Bank in its entirety. v. Count VI-Vicarious Liabilityagainst Rushford State Bank to the extent that the Court has dismissed the underlying claims. (Written Opinion) Signed by Judge Donovan W. Frank on 7/19/2017. (BJS)
|
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.
