Simmons v. Simmons
| Geoffrey H. Simmons, Jr. |
| Geoffrey H. Simmons, Sr. |
| 5:2008cv00517 |
| October 15, 2008 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina |
| Civil Rights: Other Office |
| xxU.S. Outside District |
| James C. Fox |
| Plaintiff |
| Federal Question |
| 28:1332 Diversity-Injunctive & Declaratory Relief |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
134
ORDER granting in part and denying in part 128 Motion to Claim Exempt Property - Signed by Julie Richards Johnston, Clerk of Court on 12/17/2015. (Baker, C.)
|
|
Filing
112
ORDER denying without prejudice 108 Motion to Enforce Judgment - Plaintiff may apply for a writ of execution to collect his restitutionary damages from defendants. Signed by Julie A. Richards, Clerk of Court on 03/27/2014. (Baker, C.)
|
|
Filing
107
JUDGMENT in favor of Geoffrey H. Simmons, Jr. against Simmons Law Firm and Geoffrey H. Simmons - Signed by Julie A. Richards, Clerk of Court on 03/06/2013. (Baker, C.)
|
|
Filing
82
ORDER denying 66 Motion for Sanctions - Signed by District Judge Louise Wood Flanagan on 03/15/2012. (Baker, C.)
|
|
Filing
71
ORDER - Simmons shall have twenty-one (21) days from date of entry of this order to bring himself into compliance with the court's order dated March 23, 2011, and to file with the court the entirety of his responses in discovery. Simmons is caut ioned that if issues do remain, the court will consider all sanctions available pursuant to Rule 37(b)(2), including default judgment. The court holds in abeyance plaintiff's motion for fees 56 pending Simmons's response to this order. Th e court DENIES without prejudice to renewal plaintiff's request for a discovery hearing 68 . Finally, in light of this order, the court DENIES plaintiff's motion to request enforcement 69 . Signed by District Judge Louise Wood Flanagan on 10/27/2011. (Baker, C.)
|
|
Filing
52
ORDER granting 44 Motion to Compel; 47 Motion to Amend Complaint; and, 51 Motion to Compel - Defendant is ORDERED within twenty (20) days of entry of this order to comply with the directions contained within the attached order. Plaintiff is OR DERED, within fourteen (14) days of entry of this order, to submit a schedule of his expenses associated with this motion to compel and supplement thereto. Defendant shall have fourteen (14) days thereafter to show cause as to why an award of payment should not be made. The court declines to impose sanctions at this juncture. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to take into the record plaintiff's amended complaint which is attached as Exhibit 2 to plaintiff's motion to amend. Signed by Chief Judge Louise Wood Flanagan on 03/23/2011. (Baker, C.)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
- 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: Simmons v. Simmons | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Geoffrey H. Simmons, 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: Geoffrey H. Simmons, Sr. | |
| 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.
