Stouffer et al v. JPMorgan Chase Bank NA
| John Stouffer and Nancy Stouffer |
| JPMorgan Chase Bank NA |
| 3:2018cv00591 |
| March 13, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Texas |
| Dallas Office |
| Dallas |
| Jane J. Boyle |
| All Other Real Property |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
| 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
33
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: The 30 motion to dismiss is GRANTED. Judgmentwill be entered for the defendant. (Ordered by Senior Judge A. Joe Fish on 2/19/2019) (zkc)
|
|
Filing
26
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER granting 15 Motion to Dismiss. The Stouffers' claim pursuant to the Texas Constitution is DISMISSED with prejudice. The Stouffers' claim to quiet title is DISMISSED without prejudice. The plaintiffs shall have leave to amend their complaint to cure the deficiencies -- if they can -- provided that the plaintiffs' amended complaint is filed and served no later than 12/26/2018. If no such amended complaint is filed and served, this claim will be deemed dismissed without further notice. If the plaintiffs duly amend their complaint, the defendant may reassert its motion to dismiss if it believes that the amended complaint fails to cure the defects in the original complaint noted. (Ordered by Senior Judge A. Joe Fish on 12/12/2018) (zkc) (Ordered by Senior Judge A. Joe Fish on 12/12/2018) (zkc)
|
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 Texas Northern 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.
