Cases 11 - 19 of 19
Nationstar Mortgage LLC v. Patrick Joseph Soria et al
as 2:2018cv03041
Defendant:
George Wesley Pierce, Jr., Rebekah Brown, Westwood Legal and others
Plaintiff:
Nationstar Mortgage LLC and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee for The Holders of the First Franklin Mortgage Loan Trust 2006-FF10 Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2006-FF10
Receiver:
Robb Evans & Associates LLC, Temporary Receiver and Robb Evans and Associates LLC
Interested Party:
Robert West, Morgan Picks Two LLC, Deutsche Bank National Trust Company as Trustee Formerly Known as Bankers Trust Company of California, N.A., Not in its Individual Capacity but Solely as Trustee, or its Permitted Successors and Assig and others
Intervenor Plaintiff:
Marina Ivanoff
Intervenor:
Selene Finance, Shellpoint Mortgage Servicing, Select Portfolio Services, LLC and others
Intervenor Defendant:
All Persons Unknown Claiming any Legal or Equitable Right, Title, Estate, Lien or Interest in The Subject Property Located at 390 South Sepulveda Boulevard Unit 208, Los Angeles, California 90049, APN, Kimberly L Yamada-Tung, Christina Gifford and others
Petitioner:
Garson Silvers, DNE Associates, a CA general partnership, The Bank of New York Mellon fka The Bank of New York as Trustee for the Certificateholders CWMBS, Inc CHL Mortgage Pass-Through Trust 2005-HYB4, Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2005-HYB4 and others
3Rd Party Defendant:
Century 21 Citrus Realty and Albert Rodriguez
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1962 Racketeering (RICO) Act
Innocent v. US Bank Trust, N.A.
as 2:2018cv01308
Defendant:
US Bank Trust, N.A.
Plaintiff:
Marie V. Innocent
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1391 Personal Injury
Terence Michael Agee v. US Bank Trust, N.A. et al
as 2:2017cv07323
Plaintiff:
Terence Michael Agee
Defendant:
Colorado FSB, Does, Quality Loan Service Corp. and others
Peek et al v. Nationstar Mortgage, LLC et al
as 1:2017cv00230
Defendant:
Caliber Home Loans, Inc., LSF9 Master Participation Trust ("LSF9"), Nationstar Mortgage, LLC and others
Plaintiff:
John Kukulka and Heidi Peek
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal
Dickey v. Boston, MA, et al
as 17-1094
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JAMES DICKEY
Defendant - Appellee:
BOSTON, MA, Through the Inspectional Service Department, EDWARD COBURN, individually and in his official capacity as lawyer for the City of Boston, JAMES JOSEPH COTTER, III, individually and in his official capacity as receiver for the Boston Housing Court and others
Defendant:
STEVEN AMARAL and KATIE AMARAL
US Bank Trust, N.A. v. Garcia-Padilla, et al
as 16-2439
Plaintiff - Appellee:
US BANK TRUST, N.A.
Defendant - Appellee:
ALEJANDRO J. GARCIA-PADILLA, in his official capacity as Governor of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, COMMONWEALTH OF PUERTO RICO, UNIVERSITY OF PUERTO RICO and others
Movant - Appellant:
FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT AND MANAGEMENT BOARD
Interested Party:
UNITED STATES
Dickey v. Boston, MA, et al
as 16-1962
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JAMES DICKEY
Defendant - Appellee:
BOSTON, MA, through the Inspectional Service Department, EDWARD COBURN, individually and in his official capacity as lawyer for the City of Boston, JAMES JOSEPH COTTER, III, individually and in his official capacity as receiver for the Boston Housing Court and others
In re: Dickey
as 16-1799
Petitioner:
JAMES DICKEY
Respondent:
BOSTON, MA, through the Inspectional Service Department, EDWARD COBURN, individually and in his official capacity as lawyer for the City of Boston, JAMES JOSEPH COTTER, III, individually and in his official capacity as receiver for the Boston Housing Court and others
Dickey v. Boston, MA, et al
as 16-1585
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JAMES DICKEY
Defendant - Appellee:
BOSTON, MA, through the Inspectional Service Department, EDWARD COBURN, individually and in his official capacity as lawyer for the City of Boston, JAMES JOSEPH COTTER, III, individually and in his official capacity as receiver for the Boston Housing Court and others
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.
