United States of America v. Fields et al
Case Number: 3:2006cv00697
Filed: December 11, 2006
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi
Office: Jackson Office
Presiding Judge: Daniel P. Jordan
Presiding Judge: James C. Sumner
Nature of Suit: Taxes
Cause of Action: 26:7402 IRS: Petition to Enforce IRS Summons
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
April 1, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 82 JUDGMENT in favor of Regions Bank against Eric Fields, Reginald Funchess; that on April 21, 2008, the Court entered an order 54 granting Regions unopposed motion for summary judgment 44 as to its cross-claim against Defendants Eric J. Fields and Reginald Funchess. As such, the Court finds that judgment should be entered in favor of Regions as to its cross-claims against Defendants Eric J. Fields and Reginald Funchess. Signed by District Judge Daniel P. Jordan, III on 4/1/09 (SEC)
March 9, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 75 ORDER denying 55 Motion for Summary Judgment; granting 65 Motion for Summary Judgment as set out in the order. The United States is directed to submit a proposed judgment and a proposed order directing the sale within five (5) days of entry of this order. Signed by District Judge Daniel P. Jordan III on March 9, 2009. (SP)
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 Mississippi Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: United States of America v. Fields et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | 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?