Brantley v. Citimortgage

Brantley v. Citimortgage

Plaintiff:	Phillip Brantley
Defendant:	CitiMortgage, Inc.
Case Number:	1:2016cv00707
Filed:	June 29, 2016
Court:	US District Court for the Southern District of Ohio
Office:	Cincinnati Office
County:	HAMILTON
Presiding Judge:	Timothy S. Black
Presiding Judge:	Karen L. Litkovitz
Nature of Suit:	Truth in Lending
Cause of Action:	15 U.S.C. § 1601
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
November 1, 2016	Filing 18 DECISION AND ENTRY ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE (Doc. 15). Signed by Judge Timothy S. Black on 11/1/2016. (mr)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
October 18, 2016	Filing 15 ORDER that the automatic stay provision of 11 USC 362(a) does not apply and no stay of this litigation is in effect pursuant to that provision. REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION that defendant's 8 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction and Motion for Declaration of Plaintiff as Vexatious Litigator be Granted insofar as defendant moves to dismiss the complaint and be Denied with respect to defendant's request to declare plaintiff a vexatious litigator. Plaintiff's claims be D ismissed and this case be closed on the docket of the Court. ( Objections to R&R due by 11/4/2016). Signed by Magistrate Judge Karen L. Litkovitz on 10/18/2016. (art)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)

Date Filed

Document Text

November 1, 2016

Filing 18 DECISION AND ENTRY ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE (Doc. 15). Signed by Judge Timothy S. Black on 11/1/2016. (mr)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)

October 18, 2016

Filing 15 ORDER that the automatic stay provision of 11 USC 362(a) does not apply and no stay of this litigation is in effect pursuant to that provision. REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION that defendant's 8 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction and Motion for Declaration of Plaintiff as Vexatious Litigator be Granted insofar as defendant moves to dismiss the complaint and be Denied with respect to defendant's request to declare plaintiff a vexatious litigator. Plaintiff's claims be D ismissed and this case be closed on the docket of the Court. ( Objections to R&R due by 11/4/2016). Signed by Magistrate Judge Karen L. Litkovitz on 10/18/2016. (art)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)

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 Ohio Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Brantley v. Citimortgage
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: Phillip Brantley
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: CitiMortgage, Inc.
Represented By:	Kara Ann Czanik
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?