Fulton v. United States of America et al
Plaintiff: Janice Fulton
Defendant: United States of America, Richard Callahan and John Doe
Case Number: 4:2016cv00731
Filed: May 20, 2016
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri
Office: St. Louis Office
County: Within US but Outside District
Presiding Judge: Catherine D. Perry
Nature of Suit: Motor Vehicle
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1391
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
August 18, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 71 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff Janice Fultons request for disbursement of interpleaded funds [ 70 ] is granted. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall pay from the interpleaded funds currently on deposit in t he registry of the Court the sum of One Thousand Nine Hundred Fifteen and 00/100 Dollars ($1915.00), made payable to Back & Neck Care Center of North County LLC and to be mailed to Back & Neck Care Center of North County LLC, 11638 W. Florissant Avenue, Florissant, Missouri 63033, thereby satisfying its claim for interpleaded funds [ 69 ]. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall pay the balance of the interpleaded funds to plaintiff Janice Fulton, made payable to Janice Fulton a nd to be mailed to her at 1923 N. Church Street, Belleville, Illinois 62221. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff Janice Fultons claims against defendant United States of America are dismissed with prejudice. This case, in its entirety, is now closed. Signed by District Judge Catherine D. Perry on 8/18/17. (JAB)(cc: Finance Dept.)
June 20, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 65 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER (See Full Order for Complete Details) IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendant United States of Americas Motion to Enforce Settlement Agreement 56 is granted. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendant United States of America's Motion to Deposit Settlement Proceeds into the Court's Registry 57 is denied. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the plaintiffs motion for attorney's fees 58 is denied as moot. Signed by District Judge Catherine D. Perry on 6/20/17. (EAB)
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: Fulton v. United States of America 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: Janice Fulton
Represented By: Spencer E. Farris
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: United States of America
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: Richard Callahan
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: John 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?