Paradise Valley Farms, a Nevada partnership v. Washington Mutual Bank

Justia Dockets & Filings Ninth Circuit Nevada District Court Paradise Valley Farms, a Nevada partnership v. Washington Mutual Bank

Paradise Valley Farms, a Nevada partnership v. Washington Mutual Bank

Plaintiff:	Paradise Valley Farms, a Nevada partnership
Defendant:	Washington Mutual Bank
Case Number:	3:2008cv00065
Filed:	February 1, 2008
Court:	US District Court for the District of Nevada
Office:	Reno Office
County:	Humboldt
Presiding Judge:	Larry R. Hicks
Presiding Judge:	Robert A. McQuaid
Nature of Suit:	Contract: Other
Cause of Action:	Civil Miscellaneous Case
Jury Demanded By:	None

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
August 6, 2010	Filing 56 JUDGMENT. IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that defendant's 41 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings is GRANTED. FURTHER ORDERED that defendant's 47 Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction is DENIED AS MOOT. Signed by Lance S. Wilson on 08/06/2010. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MLC)
August 5, 2010	Filing 55 MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS of the Honorable Judge Edward C. Reed, Jr, on 8/5/2010. By Deputy Clerk: Colleen Larsen. IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that defendant's 41 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings is GRANTED. FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff 's 44 Motion for Leave to Late File Their Opposition to defendant's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings is DENIED AS MOOT.FURTHER ORDERED that defendant's 47 Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction is DENIED AS MOOT. The Clerk shall enter judgment accordingly. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MLC)

Date Filed

Document Text

August 6, 2010

Filing 56 JUDGMENT. IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that defendant's 41 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings is GRANTED. FURTHER ORDERED that defendant's 47 Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction is DENIED AS MOOT. Signed by Lance S. Wilson on 08/06/2010. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MLC)

August 5, 2010

Filing 55 MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS of the Honorable Judge Edward C. Reed, Jr, on 8/5/2010. By Deputy Clerk: Colleen Larsen. IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that defendant's 41 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings is GRANTED. FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff 's 44 Motion for Leave to Late File Their Opposition to defendant's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings is DENIED AS MOOT.FURTHER ORDERED that defendant's 47 Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction is DENIED AS MOOT. The Clerk shall enter judgment accordingly. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MLC)

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

Search for this case: Paradise Valley Farms, a Nevada partnership v. Washington Mutual Bank
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: Paradise Valley Farms, a Nevada partnership
Represented By:	Treva J. Hearne
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: Washington Mutual Bank
Represented By:	J. Stephen Peek
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?