Sheridan v. Convergent Outsourcing, Inc.

Justia Dockets & Filings Sixth Circuit Tennessee Middle District Sheridan v. Convergent Outsourcing, Inc.

Sheridan v. Convergent Outsourcing, Inc.

Plaintiff:	Terry Sheridan
Defendant:	Convergent Outsourcing, Inc.
Case Number:	3:2016cv00212
Filed:	February 12, 2016
Court:	US District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee
Office:	Nashville Office
County:	Davidson
Presiding Judge:	Joe Brown
Presiding Judge:	Aleta A. Trauger
Nature of Suit:	Consumer Credit
Cause of Action:	15 U.S.C. § 1681
Jury Demanded By:	Plaintiff

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
September 12, 2016	Filing 50 ORDER: For the reasons expressed herein, the plaintiffs Objections are hereby OVERRULED and the Report and Recommendation is ACCEPTED and made the findings of fact and conclusions of law of this court. For the reasons expressed therein and herein, it is hereby ORDERED that the defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment 30 is GRANTED, and this case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. The defendant shall recover no fees and costs. This Order constitutes the final judgment in this case, and any ap peal would not be certified as taken in good faith under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3). Signed by District Judge Aleta A. Trauger on 9/12/16. (xc:Pro se party by email.)(DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(dt) Modified on 9/13/2016 (dt).
July 25, 2016	Filing 39 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: Pending before the Court is Defendant Convergent Outsourcing, Inc.'s Motion for Summary Judgment. (Docket Entry 30). For the reasons explained below, the Magistrate Judge RECOMMENDS that: 1) Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment be GRANTED; 2) Defendant's request for attorney's fees be DENIED; 3) this case be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; 4) acceptance and adoption of this Report and Recommendation constitute the FINAL JUDGMENT in this action; and 5) any appeal NOT BE CERTIFIED as taken in good faith under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3). Signed by Magistrate Judge Joe Brown on 7/25/16. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(af)

Date Filed

Document Text

September 12, 2016

Filing 50 ORDER: For the reasons expressed herein, the plaintiffs Objections are hereby OVERRULED and the Report and Recommendation is ACCEPTED and made the findings of fact and conclusions of law of this court. For the reasons expressed therein and herein, it is hereby ORDERED that the defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment 30 is GRANTED, and this case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. The defendant shall recover no fees and costs. This Order constitutes the final judgment in this case, and any ap peal would not be certified as taken in good faith under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3). Signed by District Judge Aleta A. Trauger on 9/12/16. (xc:Pro se party by email.)(DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(dt) Modified on 9/13/2016 (dt).

July 25, 2016

Filing 39 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: Pending before the Court is Defendant Convergent Outsourcing, Inc.'s Motion for Summary Judgment. (Docket Entry 30). For the reasons explained below, the Magistrate Judge RECOMMENDS that: 1) Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment be GRANTED; 2) Defendant's request for attorney's fees be DENIED; 3) this case be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; 4) acceptance and adoption of this Report and Recommendation constitute the FINAL JUDGMENT in this action; and 5) any appeal NOT BE CERTIFIED as taken in good faith under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3). Signed by Magistrate Judge Joe Brown on 7/25/16. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(af)

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 Tennessee Middle District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Sheridan v. Convergent Outsourcing, Inc.
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: Terry Sheridan
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: Convergent Outsourcing, Inc.
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?