Rosenfeld v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
Andrew Rosenfeld |
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. |
2:2020cv00443 |
January 27, 2020 |
US District Court for the Eastern District of New York |
William F Kuntz |
Vera M Scanlon |
Contract: Other |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Notice of Removal |
None |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on March 20, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 11 Letter of Ronald M. Neumann regarding defendant Wells Fargo Bank's motion to dismiss by Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (Neumann, Ronald) |
Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge William F. Kuntz, II: Pre Motion Conference held on 2/18/2020. Appearances: Leo Barnes. Esq., appeared on behalf of plaintiff Andrew Rosenfeld. Ronald Neuman, Esq., appeared on behalf of defendant Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. The Court granted Defendant's application to make a motion to dismiss. The Court ordered the following briefing schedule: 1) Defendant shall serve the motion to dismiss on or before Friday, March 20, 2020; 2) Plaintiff shall serve the memorandum in opposition on or before Friday, April 3, 2020; and 3) Defendant shall serve the reply memorandum on or before Friday, April 24, 2020. As a courtesy to the Court, the Court requests that the parties refrain from filing motion papers until the motion has been fully briefed. If the parties elect to file their motion only once it is fully briefed, the notice of motion and all supporting papers are to be served on the other parties along with a cover letter setting forth whom the movant represents and the papers being served. Only a copy of the cover letter shall be electronically filed in advance of the fully briefed motion, and it must be filed as a letter, not as a motion. On the day the motion is fully briefed, April 24, 2020, each party shall electronically file their individual motion papers by 5:00 p.m. Defense counsel shall mail a complete set of courtesy copies of all motion papers, via overnight mail, to the United States District Courthouse, attention of Mr. Andrew Jackson. (Court Reporter Lisa Schmid.) (Jackson, Andrew) |
![]() |
Filing 9 Letter Response to Pre-Motion Letter by Andrew Rosenfeld (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - WF Records) (McMahon, Ryan) |
Filing 8 STATE COURT RECORD Received from Suffolk County Clerk's Office re: Notice of Removal Index #600112-2020. (Galeano, Sonia) |
Filing 7 First MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response to Pre-Motion Letter by Andrew Rosenfeld. (McMahon, Ryan) |
![]() |
Filing 6 Letter MOTION for pre motion conference in connection with Wells Fargo's intention to file a motion to dismiss the complaint by Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.. (Neumann, Ronald) |
![]() |
Filing 5 NOTICE of Appearance by Ryan J. McMahon on behalf of Andrew Rosenfeld (aty to be noticed) (McMahon, Ryan) |
Filing 4 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. (Rodin, Deanna) |
Filing 3 This attorney case opening filing has been checked for quality control. See the attachment for corrections that were made. (Rodin, Deanna) |
Case Assigned to Judge William F. Kuntz, II and Magistrate Judge Vera M. Scanlon. 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. (Rodin, Deanna) |
Filing 2 Corporate Disclosure Statement by Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. identifying Corporate Parent Wells Fargo & Company, Corporate Parent WFC Holdings, LLC for Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.. (Neumann, Ronald) |
Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL by Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. from Supreme Court of the State of New York, Suffolk County, case number 600112/2020. ( Filing fee $ 400 receipt number ANYEDC-12300033) (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A Summons and complaint, #2 Civil Cover sheet) (Neumann, Ronald) |
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 Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Search for this case: Rosenfeld v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Plaintiff: Andrew Rosenfeld | |
Represented By: | Ryan J. McMahon |
Represented By: | Leo K. Barnes, Jr. |
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: Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. | |
Represented By: | Ronald M. Neumann |
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.