Williams v. National Credit Adjusters, LLC. et al
Plaintiff: Calvin Williams
Defendant: National Credit Adjusters, LLC., Victor Perez and Rachel Doe
Case Number: 4:2014cv00267
Filed: February 14, 2014
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri
Office: St. Louis Office
County: St. Louis - County
Presiding Judge: Charles A. Shaw
Nature of Suit: Other Fraud
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441
Jury Demanded By: Both

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
November 16, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 93 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendant National Credit Association, LLC's Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF #81] is denied. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendant National Credit Association, LLC's Motion Requesting Oral Argument on the motion [ECF #84] is denied. Signed by District Judge Catherine D. Perry on November 16, 2015. (MCB)
November 10, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 42 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff Calvin Williams' motion to remand is DENIED. [Doc. 29 ] Signed by District Judge Charles A. Shaw on 11/10/14. (KXS)
September 4, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 36 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendant National Credit Adjusters, LLC's motion to dismiss plaintiff's complaint pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b) (6) is DENIED. [Doc. 9 ] Signed by District Judge Charles A. Shaw on 9/4/14. (KXS)
March 27, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 26 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's second motion to stay defendant's Rule 12(b)(6) proceedings pending a contemplated motion for remand is DENIED. [Doc. 25] IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff shall fi le by April 1, 2014 a response to defendant's motion to dismiss. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if plaintiff does not timely comply with this Memorandum and Order, the Court will consider defendant's motion to dismiss without the benefit of any response from plaintiff. (Response to Court due by 4/1/2014.) Signed by District Judge Charles A. Shaw on 3/27/2014. (NCL)
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 Missouri Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Williams v. National Credit Adjusters, LLC. et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Calvin Williams
Represented By: Lee R. Anderson
Represented By: Rufus J. Tate, Jr.
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 [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: National Credit Adjusters, LLC.
Represented By: Richard P. Cassetta
Represented By: Thor T. Mathison
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 [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Victor Perez
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 [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Rachel Doe
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 [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | 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?