Taylor v. Timepayment Corporation

Taylor v. Timepayment Corporation

Plaintiff:	John Taylor
Defendant:	Timepayment Corporation
Case Number:	3:2018cv00378
Filed:	June 4, 2018
Court:	US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia
Office:	Richmond Office
County:	Chesterfield
Presiding Judge:	M. Hannah Lauck
Nature of Suit:	Truth in Lending
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 1331
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
March 31, 2019	Filing 37 ORDER that the Court ADOPTS in part the findings set forth in 30 R&R; OVERRULES Timepayment's 31 Objections; SUSTAINS Taylor's 32 Objection as to Count I; OVERRULES Taylor's 32 Objections as to Counts II and IV; GRANTS Timepa yment's 16 Motion to Dismiss as to Counts II and IV; DENIES Timepayment's Motion to Dismiss as to Counts I, Ill, and V; and DISMISSES Counts II and IV of Taylor's 1 Complaint. The Court GRANTS LEAVE to Taylor to amend his Compla int. Taylor SHALL file a Notice with the Court, within 7 days of this Order, advising the Court whether he will seek to amend his Complaint or instead proceed with the Complaint as narrowed by this Order. If Taylor seeks to amend the Complaint, Tayl or will have 14 days as of the filing of his Notice to file an Amended Complaint. If Taylor proceeds with the Complaint as narrowed by this Order, Timepayment will have 14 days as of that Notice to file an answer. Signed by District Judge M. Hannah Lauck on 3/31/2019. (jsmi, )

Date Filed

Document Text

March 31, 2019

Filing 37 ORDER that the Court ADOPTS in part the findings set forth in 30 R&R; OVERRULES Timepayment's 31 Objections; SUSTAINS Taylor's 32 Objection as to Count I; OVERRULES Taylor's 32 Objections as to Counts II and IV; GRANTS Timepa yment's 16 Motion to Dismiss as to Counts II and IV; DENIES Timepayment's Motion to Dismiss as to Counts I, Ill, and V; and DISMISSES Counts II and IV of Taylor's 1 Complaint. The Court GRANTS LEAVE to Taylor to amend his Compla int. Taylor SHALL file a Notice with the Court, within 7 days of this Order, advising the Court whether he will seek to amend his Complaint or instead proceed with the Complaint as narrowed by this Order. If Taylor seeks to amend the Complaint, Tayl or will have 14 days as of the filing of his Notice to file an Amended Complaint. If Taylor proceeds with the Complaint as narrowed by this Order, Timepayment will have 14 days as of that Notice to file an answer. Signed by District Judge M. Hannah Lauck on 3/31/2019. (jsmi, )

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 this case: Taylor v. Timepayment Corporation
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: John Taylor
Represented By:	Joshua Harry Erlich
Represented By:	Jesse Stine Johnson
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: Timepayment Corporation
Represented By:	Charles Kalman Seyfarth
Represented By:	Elizabeth Scott Turner
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?