Ditech Financal LLC et al v. Lockmor Holdings, LLC
Plaintiff: |
Ditech Financal LLC and Federal National Mortgage Association |
Defendant: |
Lockmor Holdings, LLC |
Case Number: |
2:2017cv01829 |
Filed: |
July 5, 2017 |
Court: |
US District Court for the District of Nevada |
Office: |
Las Vegas Office |
Presiding Judge: |
Jennifer A. Dorsey |
Presiding Judge: |
Peggy A. Leen |
Nature of Suit: |
Real Property: Other |
Cause of Action: |
28 U.S.C. § 2201 Declaratory Judgement |
Jury Demanded By: |
None |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Date Filed |
Document Text |
January 8, 2020 |
Filing
59
ORDER Granting in part Plaintiffs' 45 Motion for Summary Judgment. Summary judgment is entered in favor of Ditech Financial, LLC and the Federal National Mortgage Association on their quiet-title claim based on the Federal Foreclosure Bar . Plaintiffs' remaining claim is DISMISSED as moot. Lockmor's 55 Counter Motion for Attorney's Fees and Costs is Denied.FINAL JUDGMENT IS ENTERED in favor of the Plaintiffs Ditech Financial, LLC and the Federal National Mortgag e Association, DECLARING that: the deed of trust for the real property located at 520 Arrowhead Trail # 1122 in Henderson, Nevada, recorded as Instrument # 000015 in Book 20060314 of the real property records for Clark County, Nevada, on 3/14/06, w as not extinguished by the 3/4/15 foreclosure sale, so foreclosure-sale purchaser Lockmor Holdings, LLC took the property subject to the deed of trust. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case. Signed by Judge Jennifer A. Dorsey on 1/8/2020. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SLD)
|
August 27, 2019 |
Filing
54
ORDER granting 53 Stipulation; Re: 45 Motion for Summary Judgment. Responses due by 8/30/2019., then a three (3) week grace period allowing for the Plaintiff's to Reply. Signed by Judge Jennifer A. Dorsey on 8/27/2019. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - JM)
|
August 6, 2019 |
Filing
49
ORDER Granting 46 First Stipulation for Extension of Time Re: 45 Motion for Summary Judgment. Responses due by 8/20/2019. Signed by Judge Jennifer A. Dorsey on 8/6/2019. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SLD)
|
November 14, 2017 |
Filing
35
ORDER that this case is Stayed for all purposes. Pending dispositive 14 and 15 Motions are Denied without prejudice to their refiling once the stay is lifted. Lockmor's 27 Counter Motion for Attorney Fees and Costs is Denied. Signed by Judge Jennifer A. Dorsey on 11/14/2017. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SLD)
|
October 24, 2017 |
Filing
30
ORDER Granting 29 Stipulation for Extension of Time (Third Request) re 15 MOTION for Summary Judgment and 27 First MOTION for Attorney Fees. Replies to 15 Motion due by 11/6/2017. Responses to 27 Motion due by 11/6/2017. Replies to 27 Motion due by 11/20/2017. Signed by Judge Jennifer A. Dorsey on 10/24/2017. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SLD)
|
October 11, 2017 |
Filing
25
ORDER Granting 24 Stipulation for Extension of Time (Second Request) re 15 MOTION for Summary Judgment. Responses due by 10/13/2017. Replies due by 11/3/2017. Signed by Judge Jennifer A. Dorsey on 10/11/2017. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SLD)
|
September 13, 2017 |
Filing
18
ORDER Granting 17 Stipulation for Extension of Time (First request) re 14 MOTION to Dismiss and 15 MOTION for Summary Judgment. Responses to 14 Motion due by 9/29/2017. Replies to 15 Motion due by 10/6/2017. Signed by Judge Jennifer A. Dorsey on 9/13/2017. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SLD)
|
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 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?