Mikhael v. Credit Corp Solutions Inc.
Plaintiff: Stacie A. Mikhael
Defendant: Credit Corp Solutions Inc. and Credit Corp Solutions Inc. doing business as Tasman Credit
Case Number: 1:2020cv02908
Filed: July 1, 2020
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of New York
Presiding Judge: Steven M Gold
Referring Judge: Kiyo A Matsumoto
Nature of Suit: Consumer Credit
Cause of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692 Fair Debt Collection Act
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on June 15, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
August 27, 2020 Filing 14 NOTICE of Appearance by Jitesh Dudani on behalf of Stacie A. Mikhael (aty to be noticed) (Dudani, Jitesh)
August 27, 2020 Opinion or Order Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Kiyo A. Matsumoto: Pre-Motion Conference held on 8/27/2020. Appearance for Plaintiff: Jitesh Dudani, Esq. Appearance for Defendant: Sarah Wilson, Esq.The Court held a pre-motion conference to discuss Defendant's proposed motion to dismiss. Plaintiff's counsel clarified that Plaintiff's allegation is that the collection letter is misleading because it states that Defendant "will be sending" Plaintiff's account "to a law firm" for review (see ECF No. #1 -1), and upon Plaintiff's information and belief, Defendant did not do so. Plaintiff's counsel agreed that if Defendant sent Plaintiff's account to a law firm for review, Plaintiff would not be able to state a claim.Defendant's counsel agreed that she will provide Plaintiff's counsel with proof of the referral to a law firm by no later than September 3, 2020. By September 10, 2020, Plaintiff will file either a notice or a stipulation of dismissal, or a letter explaining why the information provided by Defendant's counsel was insufficient (along with a mutually-agreeable briefing schedule for Defendant's motion to dismiss). Ordered by Judge Kiyo A. Matsumoto on 8/27/2020. (Court Reporter Anthony Frisolone.) (Mayer, Michael)
August 25, 2020 Filing 13 NOTICE of Appearance by Sarah Wilson on behalf of Credit Corp Solutions Inc. (notification declined or already on case) (Wilson, Sarah)
August 25, 2020 Opinion or Order ORDER: #8 Motion for Extension of Time to Answer is terminated in light of request for premotion conference filed on August 14, 2020. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Steven M. Gold on 8/25/2020. (Gillespie, Saudia)
August 25, 2020 Opinion or Order ORDER: Granting #12 Motion for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice. Attorney Sarah Wilson shall register for ECF, registration is available online at www.pacer.gov. Once registered, the attorney shall file a notice of appearance and ensure that s/he receives electronic notification of activity in this case. Also, the attorney shall ensure the $150.00 admission fee be submitted to the Clerks Office via filing the event Pro Hac Vice Filing Fee. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Steven M. Gold on 8/25/2020. (Gillespie, Saudia)
August 21, 2020 Filing 12 MOTION to Appear Pro Hac Vice Filing fee $ 150, receipt number ANYEDC-13250178. by Credit Corp Solutions Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Affidavit in Support of Motion to Admit Counsel Pro Hac Vice) (Wilson, Sarah)
August 20, 2020 Opinion or Order ORDER granting #9 Motion for Pre-Motion Conference. The Court will hold a telephonic pre-motion conference on Thursday, August 27, 2020 at 1:00 p.m., to discuss the defendant's anticipated motion to dismiss. The parties shall dial into the conference by calling 1-888-684-8852 and entering the following access code: 1312089. Ordered by Judge Kiyo A. Matsumoto on 8/20/2020. (Mayer, Michael)
August 19, 2020 Filing 11 RESPONSE in Opposition re #9 Letter MOTION for pre motion conference for leave to file a motion to dismiss filed by Stacie A. Mikhael. (Cader, Jonathan)
August 14, 2020 Filing 10 NOTICE of Appearance by Jonathan Mark Cader on behalf of Stacie A. Mikhael (aty to be noticed) (Cader, Jonathan)
August 14, 2020 Filing 9 Letter MOTION for pre motion conference for leave to file a motion to dismiss by Credit Corp Solutions Inc.. (Wortman, Scott)
August 9, 2020 Filing 8 Letter MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer or Otherwise Respond to Plaintiffs Complaint by Friday, August 14, 2020 (on Consent) by Credit Corp Solutions Inc.. (Wortman, Scott)
August 6, 2020 Filing 7 NOTICE of Appearance by Scott Evan Wortman on behalf of Credit Corp Solutions Inc. (aty to be noticed) (Wortman, Scott)
July 14, 2020 Filing 6 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Stacie A. Mikhael. Credit Corp Solutions Inc. served on 7/7/2020, answer due 7/28/2020. (Sanders, Craig)
July 1, 2020 Filing 5 Summons Issued as to Credit Corp Solutions Inc.. (Davis, Kimberly)
July 1, 2020 Filing 4 This attorney case opening filing has been checked for quality control. See the attachment for corrections that were made, if any. (Davis, Kimberly)
July 1, 2020 Filing 3 In accordance with Rule 73 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Rule 73.1, the parties are notified that if all parties consent a United States magistrate judge of this court is available to conduct all proceedings in this civil action including a (jury or nonjury) trial and to order the entry of a final judgment. Attached to the Notice is a blank copy of the consent form that should be filled out, signed and filed electronically only if all parties wish to consent. The form may also be accessed at the following link: #http://www.uscourts.gov/uscourts/FormsAndFees/Forms/AO085.pdf. You may withhold your consent without adverse substantive consequences. Do NOT return or file the consent unless all parties have signed the consent. (Davis, Kimberly)
July 1, 2020 Filing 2 NOTICE of Appearance by David M. Barshay on behalf of Stacie A. Mikhael (aty to be noticed) (Barshay, David)
July 1, 2020 Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Credit Corp Solutions Inc. filing fee $ 400, receipt number ANYEDC-13002118 Was the Disclosure Statement on Civil Cover Sheet completed -NO,, filed by Stacie A. Mikhael. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit, #2 Civil Cover Sheet, #3 Proposed Summons) (Sanders, Craig)
July 1, 2020 Case Assigned to Judge Kiyo A. Matsumoto and Magistrate Judge Steven M. Gold. Please download and review the Individual Practices of the assigned Judges, located on our #website. Attorneys are responsible for providing courtesy copies to judges where their Individual Practices require such. (Davis, Kimberly)

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 New York Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Mikhael v. Credit Corp Solutions Inc.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Stacie A. Mikhael
Represented By: David M. Barshay
Represented By: Craig B. Sanders
Represented By: Jitesh Dudani
Represented By: Jonathan Mark Cader
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: Credit Corp Solutions Inc.
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: Credit Corp Solutions Inc. doing business as Tasman Credit
Represented By: Sarah Wilson
Represented By: Scott Evan Wortman
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?