Kaiser et al v. Cascade Capital LLC et al
| Michael Kaiser and Margaret J. Loewen |
| Cascade Capital LLC and Gordon Aylworth & Tami PC |
| 3:2016cv00744 |
| April 29, 2016 |
| US District Court for the District of Oregon |
| Portland (3) Office |
| John V. Acosta |
| Consumer Credit |
| 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
151
Opinion and Order: For these reasons, I ADOPT the F&R 142 in part and DECLINE TO ADOPT in part as my own opinion. Defendants' Motion to Dismiss 117 is GRANTED in its entirety and Plaintiffs' claims against Defendants are dismissed with prejudice. Signed on 2/4/2019 by Judge Michael W. Mosman. (kms)
|
|
Filing
103
OPINION and ORDER - The Court ADOPTS the Magistrate Judge's Amended Findings and Recommendation 99 . For these reasons, the Court ADOPTS in part and DECLINES TO ADOPT in part the Magistrate Judges F&R 71 . The Court GRANTS in part and DENIES i n part Defendants Motion to Dismiss 19 for Failure to State a Claim. The Court denies Defendants Motion insofar as it is based on Rule 12(b)(1). The Court grants in part Defendants Motion insofar as it seeks dismissal of Loewens FAC pursuant to Rul e 12(b)(6), but denies in part Defendants Rule(12)(b)(6) Motion to the extent that it seeks dismissal of Loewens claims with prejudice. The Court also DENIES Defendants Motion to Strike and GRANTS Defendants Motion to Make More Definite and Certain. The Court, therefore, DISMISSES Loewens FAC 14 without prejudice pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) with leave to amend in the event that Loewen can allege in good faith factssufficient to address the pleading deficiencies identified in this Opinion and Order and in those portions of the F&R that the Court adopts. IT IS SO ORDERED.DATED this 28th day of March, 2018, by Chief United States District Judge Michael W. Mosman (peg)
|
|
Filing
86
OPINION and ORDER - Because Plaintiffs' claims are now STAYED pending arbitration, the matters raised in Defendants' Motion to Dismiss 19 are moot. The Court, therefore, DECLINES TO ADOPT the Magistrate Judge's F&R 71 and DENIES De fendants' Motion to Dismiss (19] as moot with leave to renew in the event that the arbitrator concludes Plaintiffs' claims are not subject toarbitration. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED this 31st day of August, 2017. Signed on 8/31/17 by Chief United States District Judge Michael W. Mosman. (peg)
|
|
Filing
85
OPINION and ORDER - I agree with Judge Acostas recommendations and ADOPT theF&R 56 as my own opinion. Defendants Motion to Compel Arbitration 16 is GRANTED as to the question of whether the arbitration agreement encompasses FDCPA claims. Mr. Kais ers claims against Defendants are STAYED pending the arbitrators decision on whether Mr. Kaisers FDCPA claim is subject to arbitration. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED this 12th day of July, 2017, by Chief United States District Judge Michael W. Mosman.. (peg)
|
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 Oregon 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.
