Powell v. Bank of America NA
| Dennis J Powell |
| Bank of America NA |
| 3:2023cv00512 |
| February 6, 2023 |
| US District Court for the District of South Carolina |
| Joseph F Anderson |
| Other Statutory Actions |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 Fed. Question |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 28, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 10 TEXT ORDER granting #9 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response to #8 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM , Response to Motion due by 4/12/2023. 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. Directed by Honorable Joseph F Anderson, Jr on 3/28/23.(mflo, ) |
| Filing 9 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to #8 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM by Dennis J Powell. Response to Motion due by 4/10/2023. 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. No proposed order.(Maxfield, Dave) |
| Filing 8 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM by Bank of America NA. Response to Motion due by 3/29/2023. 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 Memo in Support, #2 Exhibit A - Letter)Proposed order is being emailed to chambers with copy to opposing counsel.(McPherson, Thomas) |
| Filing 7 TEXT ORDER granting #6 Motion for Extension of Time to Answer re #1 Notice of Removal (Complaint) filed by Bank of America NA, Bank of America NA answer due 3/15/2023. Directed by Honorable Joseph F Anderson, Jr on 2/14/23.(mflo, ) |
| Filing 6 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer re #1 Notice of Removal by Bank of America NA. Response to Motion due by 2/27/2023. 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.(McPherson, Thomas) |
| Filing 4 Local Rule 26.01 Answers to Interrogatories by Dennis J Powell.(Maxfield, Dave) |
| Filing 2 Local Rule 26.01 Answers to Interrogatories by Bank of America NA.(mflo, ) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Richland County Court of Common Pleas, case number 2023-CP-40-0010. (Filing fee $ 402 receipt number ASCDC-10930038), filed by Bank of America NA. (Attachments: #1 State Court Documents)(mflo, ) |
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 Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
| Search for this case: Powell v. Bank of America NA | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Dennis J Powell | |
| Represented By: | Dave Maxfield |
| 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: Bank of America NA | |
| Represented By: | Thomas Richmond McPherson, III |
| 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.
