Venezia v. 12th & Division Properties, LLC et al
| Shawn A. Venezia |
| 12th & Division Properties, LLC, CJUF II Terrazzo LLC and Bank of America, N.A. |
| 3:2009cv00430 |
| May 13, 2009 |
| US District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee |
| Nashville Office |
| Davidson |
| E. Clifton Knowles |
| Thomas Wiseman |
| None |
| 00 U.S.C. ยง 0000 Cause Code Unknown |
| None |
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
47
ORDER: For the reasons explained in the accompanying Memorandum Opinion, the Court finds that Plaintiffs have failed to state a plausible claim for relief based upon Defendants' failure to "register" the Terrazzo Project with HUD or ba sed upon Defendants' decision to use "non-sound-insulated glass" on the Project. The Motion to Dismiss 36 is hereby GRANTED insofar as it pertains to those claims, and those claims are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. In all other respects, Defendants' motion is DENIED. The parties are further advised that all future filings in these consolidated matters should be entered under Civil Case No. 3:09-cv-430 only. Signed by Senior Judge Thomas Wiseman on 7/30/10. (dt)
|
|
Filing
28
ORDER: Deft's 24 Motion to Dismiss is granted in its entirety; however, some claims will be dismissed without prejudice while others will be dismissed with prejudice. The granting of Defendants' motion does not result in a dismissal of th is action as a whole in light of the Defendants' pending counterclaim. Should the plaintiff choose to amend his complaint to address the deficiencies identified and discussed in the accompanying Memorandum Opinion, such Second Amended Complaint must be filed no later than 14 days after entry of this Order. This matter is referred back to Magistrate Judge Knowles for further case management as necessary. Signed by Senior Judge Thomas Wiseman on 02/09/2010. (ab)
|
|
Filing
18
ORDER: For the reasons set forth in the accompanying Memorandum Opinion, the Court is persuaded by the Defendants' argument that the Plaintiff's claim for rescission, based solely upon Defendants' failure to provide a Property Report a s required by the ILSFDA, must be dismissed as a result of the Plaintiff's failure to give notice of his intent to exercise his right to rescind within the two-year period set forth in 15 U.S.C. § 1703(c). Defendants' Motion to Dismiss is therefore GRANTED, and the claim in Count I for rescission based upon 15 U.S.C. § 1703(c) is hereby DISMISSED. The remaining claims in the Complaint being unaffected by this decision, this matter is referred back to the Magistrate Judge for further case management as necessary. It is so ORDERED. Signed by Senior Judge Thomas Wiseman on 7/30/09. (af)
|
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 Tennessee Middle 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.
