George v. Morton, et al
||September 8, 2006
||US District Court for the District of Nevada
||Contract: Other Office
||George W Foley
||Philip M. Pro
|Nature of Suit:
|Cause of Action:
|Jury Demanded By:
||28:1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
Access additional case information on PACER
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|February 5, 2009
ORDER REGARDING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS; The 142 Findings and Recommendation are Affirmed. The 85 Answer of Defendants IDM Properties, LP; IDM Properties (Nevada), LLC; IDM Investments 1, LP; and IDM Investments 2, LP are hereby Stricken a nd Default is entered in favor of Plaintiff Patrick George, and against said Defendants for the failure of said Defendants to comply with the Order of the Court to obtain counsel. Signed by Judge Philip M. Pro on 02/05/09. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SRK)
|January 22, 2009
ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION: The Clerk shall mail a copy of this Order to Defendants IDM Properties, LLP; IDM Properties (Nevada), LLC; IDM Investments 1, LP and IDM Investments 2, LP, c/o Christopher Milam, International Development Manage ment, 3980 Howard Hughes Parkway, Ste. 150, Las Vegas, NV 89169. It is RECOMMENDED that the 85 Answer of Defendants IDM Properties, LP; IDM Properties (Nevada), LLC; IDM Investments 1, LP; and IDM Investments 2, LP be stricken and their default entered based on Defendants failure to comply with this Courts Order to obtain counsel. Objections to R&R due by 2/2/2009 Signed by Magistrate Judge George W Foley, Jr on 01/22/09. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SRK)
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 Nevada District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
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?