Wright et al v. CMH Homes, Inc.
Plaintiff: Joseph Wright and Gail Wright
Defendant: CMH Homes, Inc. doing business as Oakwood Homes Charleston
Case Number: 2:2022cv02694
Filed: August 16, 2022
Court: US District Court for the District of South Carolina
Presiding Judge: Bruce Howe Hendricks
Nature of Suit: Contract: Other
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
Jury Demanded By: Both
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on September 28, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
September 28, 2022 Filing 8 JUDGMENT: Plaintiffs, Joseph Wright and Gail Wright, shall take nothing of Defendant, CMH Homes, Inc., as to the complaint filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1332 and this action is dismissed without prejudice. (hcor, )
September 28, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 7 ORDER The Consent Motion to Dismiss [ECF No. 6] is hereby GRANTED, and this action is dismissed without prejudice. Signed by Honorable Bruce Howe Hendricks on 09/28/2022.(hcor, )
September 27, 2022 Filing 6 Consent MOTION to Dismiss by CMH Homes, Inc.. Response to Motion due by 10/11/2022. Add an additional 3 days only if served by mail or otherwise allowed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 6 or Fed. R. Crim. P. 45. Proposed order is being emailed to chambers with copy to opposing counsel.(Charles, Nicholas)
August 17, 2022 Filing 4 MOTION to Dismiss and Compel Arbitration by CMH Homes, Inc.. Response to Motion due by 8/31/2022. Add an additional 3 days only if served by mail or otherwise allowed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 6 or Fed. R. Crim. P. 45. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A-Sales Agreement, #2 Exhibit B-Certificate of Origin, #3 Exhibit C-Binding Dispute Resolution Agreement, #4 Exhibit D-Homeowner Manual)No proposed order.(Charles, Nicholas)
August 15, 2022 Filing 2 Local Rule 26.01 Answers to Interrogatories by Oakwood Homes of Charleston. (adic, )
August 15, 2022 Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Court of Common Pleas for the Ninth Judicial Circuit, Charleston County, case number 2022CP1003190. (Filing fee $ 402 receipt number ASCDC-10646648), filed by Oakwood Homes of Charleston. (Attachments: #1 State Court Documents, #2 Supporting Documents, #3 Exhibit A-Sales Agreement, #4 Exhibit B-Certificate of Origin, #5 Exhibit C-Binding Dispute, #6 Exhibit D-Homeowner Manual)(adic, )

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 South Carolina District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Wright et al v. CMH Homes, Inc.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Joseph Wright
Represented By: Salvatore Giancarlo Davi
Represented By: Thomas S Tisdale, Jr
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 ]
Plaintiff: Gail Wright
Represented By: Salvatore Giancarlo Davi
Represented By: Thomas S Tisdale, Jr
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: CMH Homes, Inc. doing business as Oakwood Homes Charleston
Represented By: Nicholas A Charles
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?