Ramsey v. Receivables Performance Management, LLC
| Phillip Ramsey |
| Receivables Performance Management, LLC |
| 1:2016cv01059 |
| November 8, 2016 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Ohio |
| Cincinnati Office |
| XX US, Outside State |
| Susan J. Dlott |
| Other Statutory Actions |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 |
| 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
124
BRIEFING ORDER: The Court will permit the parties to engage in briefing as to the effect of Duguid on its Order. The parties' proposal to "supplement" their Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 motions cannot be adopted because the Court has ruled on t hose summary judgment motions and terminated them from its docket. As such, the Rule 56 motions are resolved. The parties may, however, move for reconsideration of the Court's ruling on those motions under an applicable Federal Rule of Civil P rocedure, such as Rule 60(b). Such motions shall be limited to 15 pages and due on June 25, 2021. Responses shall be limited to 10 pages and due on July 9, 2021. Any replies shall be limited to 3 pages and due on July 16, 2021. The Court will contact the parties if it finds oral argument necessary. Additionally, the Court VACATES the telephonic status conference scheduled for June 1, 2021 at 11:30 A.M. IT IS AO ORDERED. Signed by Judge Matthew W. McFarland on 05/28/2021. (kaf)
|
|
Filing
120
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: Based on the reasons above, the Court GRANTS IN PART Ramsey's 80 motion for summary judgment against RPM and awards Ramsey $122,500.00 for RPM's 245 TCPA violations. The Court DENIES IN PART Ramsey's 80 motion as it relates to his OCSPA claim and DENIES Defendants' 82 motion for summary judgment. Signed by Judge Matthew W. McFarland on 12/15/2020. (kaf)
|
|
Filing
79
AMENDED ORDER overruling objections and affirming Order re 78 Order overruling objections and affirming Order. Signed by Judge Susan J. Dlott on 3/7/19. (wam)
|
|
Filing
78
ORDER Overruling 62 Objections to the Magistrate Judge's Order 61 . Signed by Judge Susan J. Dlott on 3/6/19. (wam)
|
|
Filing
61
ORDER following 60 Telephone Conference. Assuming the parties entered into an agreement to arbitrate the dispute before the Court, the Court finds RPM has waived its right to arbitration. Signed by Magistrate Judge Karen L. Litkovitz on 1/25/2019. (art)
|
|
Filing
27
STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER. Signed by Judge Susan J. Dlott on 9/13/17. (wam)
|
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 Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
| Search for this case: Ramsey v. Receivables Performance Management, LLC | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Phillip Ramsey | |
| Represented By: | Cori R Besse |
| Represented By: | Adam V Sadlowski |
| 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: Receivables Performance Management, LLC | |
| 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.
