Lundstrom v. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation

Justia Dockets & Filings Eighth Circuit Nebraska District Court Lundstrom v. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation

Lundstrom v. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation

Plaintiff:	Gilbert G. Lundstrom
Defendant:	Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
Case Number:	8:2011cv00094
Filed:	March 15, 2011
Court:	US District Court for the District of Nebraska
Office:	8 Omaha Office
Presiding Judge:	F.A. Gossett
Nature of Suit:	Banks and Banking
Cause of Action:	12 U.S.C. § 1821 Default of Loan by Promissary Note
Jury Demanded By:	Plaintiff

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed	Document Text
January 12, 2012	Filing 32 ORDER OF DISMISSAL that this action is dismissed with prejudice and that this dismissal shall have no effect whatsoever on any claims or causes of action of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, in any of its capacities, against Plaintiff Gilbert G. Lundstrom. Each party is responsible for their own costs of court. Ordered by Judge Joseph F. Bataillon. (ADB)
January 6, 2012	Filing 30 ORDER that this matter is before the Court after a telephonic hearing with counsel on January 4, 2012. The court is advised that this action has been settled. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED: This action is stayed pending settlement approval. The 27 Motion to Extend and 14 Motion to Dismiss are denied as moot, without prejudice to refiling if settlement is not finalized. The parties shall file a status report within 60 days of the date of this order and every thirty days thereafter until settlement is effectuated. Ordered by Judge Joseph F. Bataillon. (ADB )

Date Filed

Document Text

January 12, 2012

Filing 32 ORDER OF DISMISSAL that this action is dismissed with prejudice and that this dismissal shall have no effect whatsoever on any claims or causes of action of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, in any of its capacities, against Plaintiff Gilbert G. Lundstrom. Each party is responsible for their own costs of court. Ordered by Judge Joseph F. Bataillon. (ADB)

January 6, 2012

Filing 30 ORDER that this matter is before the Court after a telephonic hearing with counsel on January 4, 2012. The court is advised that this action has been settled. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED: This action is stayed pending settlement approval. The 27 Motion to Extend and 14 Motion to Dismiss are denied as moot, without prejudice to refiling if settlement is not finalized. The parties shall file a status report within 60 days of the date of this order and every thirty days thereafter until settlement is effectuated. Ordered by Judge Joseph F. Bataillon. (ADB )

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 Nebraska District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Lundstrom v. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Defendant: Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
Represented By:	James J. Frost
Represented By:	Robert P. Diederich
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 ]
Plaintiff: Gilbert G. Lundstrom
Represented By:	Brian J. Koenig
Represented By:	Gregory C. Scaglione
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?