Schumacher v. SC Data Center, Inc.
Ria Schumacher |
SC Data Center, Inc. |
2:2016cv04078 |
March 4, 2016 |
US District Court for the Western District of Missouri |
Jefferson City Office |
Cole |
Nanette K. Laughrey |
Consumer Credit |
15 U.S.C. ยง 1681 |
Plaintiff |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 123 ORDER by Judge Nanette K. Laughrey. Plaintiff's motion for fees (Doc. 117 ) is DENIED. (Sreeprakash, Netra) |
Filing 109 ORDER by Judge Nanette K. Laughrey. Schumacher's motion for reconsideration (Doc. 103 ) is GRANTED. The Court REVERSES its decision dismissing Counts II and III, and DENIES SC's motion to dismiss (Doc. 16 ) in its entirety. (Sreeprakash, Netra) (Sreeprakash, Netra) |
Filing 76 ORDER entered by Judge Nanette K. Laughrey. The parties' joint motion for preliminary approval of class settlement, Doc. 72 , is granted on the condition that: (1) the settlement checks shall not expire for 180 days rather than the 90 days prov ided in Paragraph V.A.8. in Doc.[72-2], p. 11; and (2) the following two sentences are added to the end of Paragraph V.A.2. in Doc. [72-2], p. 10: "To the extent a notice is returned with a forwarding address, the Settlement Administrator will r e-mail the notice to the forwarding address. If any notice is returned as undeliverable, the Settlement Administrator will do a skip trace and if a new address is identified, will re-mail the notice"; and (3) the last three sentences of Paragra ph V.A.8. in Doc. [72-2], p. 11-12 are edited as provided in Section 1.c. of this Order. A final settlement approval hearing will be held at 10:00 a.m. on August 3, 2017, at 80 Lafayette Street, Jefferson City, Missouri 65101, District Courtroom 4A. Signed on 4/24/2017 by District Judge Nanette K. Laughrey. (Specker, Suzanne) |
Filing 69 Defendant's motion to certify for interlocutory appeal, Doc. 62 , is denied. The Court further orders the parties to submit their proposed settlement documents for preliminary approval on or before 3/16/2017. Signed on 2/21/2017 by District Judge Nanette K. Laughrey. (Specker, Suzanne) |
Filing 61 ORDER entered by Judge Nanette Laughrey. SC Data's motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, Doc. 16 , is denied. Schumacher's request for an order enforcing the settlement agreement is granted, Doc. 51 . The Court further orders the parties to submit their proposed settlement documents on or before 1/3/2017. (Specker, Suzanne) |
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 Western 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
Search for this case: Schumacher v. SC Data Center, Inc. | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Plaintiff: Ria Schumacher | |
Represented By: | Charles Jason Brown |
Represented By: | Jayson A. Watkins |
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: SC Data Center, Inc. | |
Represented By: | James P. Sanders |
Represented By: | John T. Walsh |
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.