Ridley v. Fay Servicing, LLC
| Sasha Ridley |
| Fay Servicing, LLC |
| 1:2023cv00864 |
| July 3, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia |
| John F Anderson |
| T S Ellis |
| Consumer Credit |
| 15 U.S.C. ยง 1692 Fair Debt Collection Act |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on August 2, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 10
ORDER granting #8 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to Respond to the Complaint for Plaintiff, Sasha Ridley. It is further ORDERED that the time within which Defendant must respond to Plaintiff's Complaint shall be EXTENDED up to and including September 5, 2023. Signed by Magistrate Judge John F. Anderson on 08/02/2023. (Dcrow, )
|
| Filing 9 Waiver of hearing or requirement to set return date on consent motion) re #8 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer or otherwise respond by Fay Servicing, LLC (Nader, John) |
| Filing 8 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer or otherwise respond by Fay Servicing, LLC. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order Proposed Order)(Nader, John) |
| Filing 7 NOTICE of Appearance by John Alexander Nader on behalf of Fay Servicing, LLC (Nader, John) |
| Filing 6 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Sasha Ridley Fay Servicing, LLC served on 7/13/2023, answer due 8/3/2023 (Kelly, Kristi) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE of Appearance by James Patrick McNichol on behalf of Sasha Ridley (McNichol, James) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE of Appearance by Casey Shannon Nash on behalf of Sasha Ridley (Nash, Casey) |
| Filing 3 Summons Issued as to Fay Servicing, LLC, NOTICE TO ATTORNEY: Please remove the headers and print two duplexed copies of the electronically issued summons for each Defendant. Please serve one copy of the summons and a copy of the Complaint upon each Defendant. Please ensure that your process server returns the service copy (executed or unexecuted) to your attention and electronically file it using the filing events, Summons Returned Executed or Summons Returned Unexecuted. (Attachments: #1 Notice to Attorney)(show) |
| Initial Case Assignment to District Judge T. S. Ellis, III and Magistrate Judge John F. Anderson. (show) |
| Filing 2 Proposed Summons by Sasha Ridley. (Kelly, Kristi) |
| Filing 1 Complaint ( Filing fee $ 402, receipt number AVAEDC-9009090.), filed by Sasha Ridley. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Kelly, Kristi) |
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 Virginia Eastern 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: Ridley v. Fay Servicing, LLC | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Sasha Ridley | |
| Represented By: | Kristi Cahoon Kelly |
| Represented By: | Casey Shannon Nash |
| Represented By: | James Patrick McNichol |
| 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: Fay Servicing, LLC | |
| Represented By: | John Alexander Nader |
| 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.
