Fisher v. Wells Fargo

Fisher v. Wells Fargo

Plaintiff:	Michael J. Fisher
Defendant:	Wells Fargo Bank N.A
Case Number:	4:2016cv00394
Filed:	June 15, 2016
Court:	U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
Office:	Sherman Office
County:	XX US, Outside State
Presiding Judge:	Amos L. Mazzant
Nature of Suit:	Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action:	31 U.S.C. § 3729
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
May 27, 2026	Filing 93 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER. It is ORDERED that Defendant Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.'s Motion to Reconsider, or Clarify, Ruling on Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. No. 80 ) (Dkt. # 86 ) is hereby GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. It is further ORDERED th at all of Relator Yaqar Hogan's claims set forth in the Second Amended Complaint are hereby DISMISSED without prejudice. It is further ORDERED that the Court's dismissal of Relator Yaqar Hogan's claims shall have no effect upon Relator Michael J. Fisher's claims against Defendant Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. in this case. It is further ORDERED that pursuant to the Court's January 12, 2026 Order (Dkt. # 89 ), the parties shall submit a proposed amended scheduling order to the Court within thirty (30) days of the date of this Order. Signed by Chief District Judge Amos L Mazzant on 5/27/2026. (CLC)
September 30, 2025	Filing 80 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER. It is ORDERED that Defendant Well Fargo Bank, N.A.'s Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. # 60 ) is hereby GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Signed by Chief District Judge Amos L Mazzant on 9/30/2025. (CLC)

Date Filed

Document Text

May 27, 2026

Filing 93 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER. It is ORDERED that Defendant Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.'s Motion to Reconsider, or Clarify, Ruling on Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. No. 80 ) (Dkt. # 86 ) is hereby GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. It is further ORDERED th at all of Relator Yaqar Hogan's claims set forth in the Second Amended Complaint are hereby DISMISSED without prejudice. It is further ORDERED that the Court's dismissal of Relator Yaqar Hogan's claims shall have no effect upon Relator Michael J. Fisher's claims against Defendant Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. in this case. It is further ORDERED that pursuant to the Court's January 12, 2026 Order (Dkt. # 89 ), the parties shall submit a proposed amended scheduling order to the Court within thirty (30) days of the date of this Order. Signed by Chief District Judge Amos L Mazzant on 5/27/2026. (CLC)

September 30, 2025

Filing 80 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER. It is ORDERED that Defendant Well Fargo Bank, N.A.'s Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. # 60 ) is hereby GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Signed by Chief District Judge Amos L Mazzant on 9/30/2025. (CLC)

Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the Texas Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Fisher v. Wells Fargo
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: Michael J. Fisher
Represented By:	Samuel L Boyd
Represented By:	Catherine Carlyle Jobe
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	[ Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Defendant: Wells Fargo Bank N.A
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	[ 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?