Sealy et al v. Ocwen Mortgage Servicing, Inc. et al
| Michael Sealy and Shelly Sealy |
| Ocwen Mortgage Servicing, Inc., Fay Servicing, LLC and Christiana Trust |
| 3:2016cv00143 |
| March 23, 2016 |
| US District Court for the Western District of North Carolina |
| Charlotte Office |
| Union |
| David Keesler |
| Max O. Cogburn |
| All Other Real Property |
| Diversity - Notice of Removal |
| Plaintiff |
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
34
CLERK'S JUDGMENT is hereby entered in accordance with the Court's Order dated 10/19/2017. Signed by Clerk, Frank G. Johns.(chh)
|
|
Filing
19
ORDER that parties shall file a Notice on or before 1/6/2017 identifying mediator and mediation date & provide explanation & show cause why sanctions should not issue for not following the Court's 11/28/16 Order.. Signed by Magistrate Judge David Keesler on 01/03/2017. (ttl)
|
|
Filing
18
ORDER granting 16 Motion to Compel. Plaintiff shall provide full responses to Defendant Ocwen's discovery requests, as well as dates for depositions, on or before December 9, 2016. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs shall reimburse Defendant Ocwen Mortgage Servicing, Inc. for its reasonable expense incurred in preparing and filing Document Nos. 16 and 17 in this case. Signed by Magistrate Judge David Keesler on 11/28/16. (mga)
|
|
Filing
14
ORDER denying 7 Motion to Remand to State Court. Signed by Magistrate Judge David Keesler on 8/9/2016. (chh)
|
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
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.
