Neff et al v. Flagstar Bank, FSB
| Tim L Neff and Bobbie K Neff |
| Flagstar Bank, FSB |
| 2:2011cv01136 |
| December 20, 2011 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Ohio |
| Columbus Office |
| KNOX |
| Gregory L Frost |
| Norah McCann King |
| Other Statutory Actions |
| 15 U.S.C. ยง 1692 Fair Debt Collection Act |
| 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
58
JUDGMENT is entered pursuant to the Opinion and Order filed 08/05/2014. This case is closed. (dh1)
|
|
Filing
40
OPINION AND ORDER granting in part and denying in part 35 Motion to Compel. Signed by Magistrate Judge Norah McCann King on 10/30/2013. (pes1)
|
|
Filing
28
OPINION AND ORDER granting in part and denying in part 3 Defendant's Motion to Dismiss. The Court grants the motion as it relates to the Neffs' claim under the FDCPA, 15 U.S.C. § 1692 et seq., and denies the motion as to the fraudulent misrepresentation and promissory estoppel claims. Signed by Judge Edmund A Sargus on 07/25/2013. (dh1)
|
|
Filing
13
ORDER setting briefing schedule: Defendant may file a memorandum in opposition to the motion for a temporary restraining order on or before 4/23/2012; Plaintiffs may file a reply memorandum on or before 04/30/2012. The Court has scheduled a telephone conference on 04/18/2012 at 10:00 a.m. Signed by Judge Edmund A Sargus on 04/17/2012. (dh1)
|
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
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.
