Randall v. Midland Funding et al
| David Randall |
| Midland Funding and Messerli & Kramer |
| 8:2009cv00073 |
| March 2, 2009 |
| US District Court for the District of Nebraska |
| Other Statutory Actions Office |
| Douglas |
| Joseph F. Bataillon |
| Thomas D. Thalken |
| Plaintiff |
| Federal Question |
| 15:1692 Fair Debt Collection Act |
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
44
ORDER FOR DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE approving 42 Stipulation for Dismissal. IT IS THEREFORE, ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED THAT this case is dismissed with prejudice pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 41, with each party to pay its won fees and costs except as otherwise provided for in the confidential settlement agreement between the parties. Ordered by Chief Judge Joseph F. Bataillon. (PCV, )
|
|
Filing
28
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - Defendants' motion to dismiss, 8 , the plaintiff's amended complaint, is denied, in part, and is granted, in part. Defendants' motion is denied with respect to violations of 15 U.S.C. § 1692e, e(8), c(a)(2); however, defendants' motion is granted with respect to 15 U.S.C. § 1692f. The defendants' request for attorneys' fees, 8 is denied. Ordered by Chief Judge Joseph F. Bataillon. (KBJ)
|
|
Filing
13
ORDER granting 12 Motion to Extend ; Plaintiff is granted until May 20, 2009, to file his Brief in Opposition to 8 Motion to Dismiss and for the Award of Attorney's Fees. Ordered by Chief Judge Joseph F. Bataillon. (ADB, )
|
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 Nebraska 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.
