We are checking for the latest updates in this case. We will email you when the process is complete.

Challenge Financial -V- Rodriguez-Moreno Print

Case Last Refreshed: 1 year ago

Challenge Financial Services, Inc., A California Corporation, filed a(n) Collections - Creditor case represented by Law Office Of Charles A Pernice, against Rodriguez-Cruz, Cayetano, Rodriguez-Moreno, Esteban, represented by Pro Se, in the jurisdiction of San Bernardino County. This case was filed in San Bernardino County Superior Courts San Bernardino with Michael M. Dest presiding.

Case Details for Challenge Financial Services, Inc., A California Corporation v. Rodriguez-Cruz, Cayetano , et al.

Judge

Michael M. Dest

Filing Date

October 22, 2015

Category

Collections-Crc3.740 (10K To 25K)

Last Refreshed

July 01, 2023

Practice Area

Creditor

Time to Dismissal Following Dispositive Motions

280 days

Filing Location

San Bernardino County, CA

Matter Type

Collections

Filing Court House

San Bernardino

Case Cycle Time

473 days

Parties for Challenge Financial Services, Inc., A California Corporation v. Rodriguez-Cruz, Cayetano , et al.

Plaintiffs

Challenge Financial Services, Inc., A California Corporation

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

Law Office Of Charles A Pernice

Defendants

Rodriguez-Cruz, Cayetano

Rodriguez-Moreno, Esteban

Attorneys for Defendants

Pro Se

Other Parties

Conv (Conversion Event)

Case Documents for Challenge Financial Services, Inc., A California Corporation v. Rodriguez-Cruz, Cayetano , et al.

Summons Issued and Filed

Date: October 22, 2015

Notice Imaged

Date: October 22, 2015

Civil Case Cover Sheet Filed

Date: October 22, 2015

Answer Filed

Date: February 16, 2016

Notice Imaged

Date: February 16, 2016

Proof of Service Filed

Date: February 16, 2016

Legacy Minutes

Date: May 16, 2016

Legacy Minutes

Date: July 13, 2016

Legacy Minutes

Date: September 13, 2016

Declaration re:

Date: October 14, 2016

Legacy Minutes

Date: October 14, 2016

Miscellaneous Document Filed

Date: January 03, 2017

Proof of Service Filed

Date: January 03, 2017

Miscellaneous Document Filed

Date: January 03, 2017

Miscellaneous Document Filed

Date: January 04, 2017

Legacy Minutes

Date: January 13, 2017

Miscellaneous Document Filed

Date: January 04, 2017

Case Events for Challenge Financial Services, Inc., A California Corporation v. Rodriguez-Cruz, Cayetano , et al.

Type Description
Docket Event Legacy Minutes
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE:STATUS OF JUDGMENT AFTER COURT TRIAL
Docket Event Judgment on Complaint Filed
JUDGMENT ON COMPLAINT (MEDIUM) OF CHALLENGE FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC., A FILED JUDGMENT ON COMPLAINT (MEDIUM) OF CHALLENGE FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC., A ORDERED ENTERED 02/06/17 JUDGMENT FOR: CHALLENGE FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC., A JUDGMENT AGAINST: ESTEBAN RODRIGUEZ-MORENO, CAYETANO RODRIGUEZ-CRUZ JUDGMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF: PRINCIPAL $10,703.01 INTEREST $3,636.00 ATTORNEY FEES $1,157.00 COSTS $529.42 AND DAMAGES $0.00. JUDGMENT TOTAL IS: $16025.43 STAGE AT DISPOSITION: ENTRY OF JUDGMENT - COURT FINDING AFTER COURT TRIAL (CIV) DISPOSITION: ENTRY OF JUDGMENT - COURT FINDING AFTER COURT TRIAL (CIV)

Judge: Dest, Michael M

Docket Event Legacy Minutes
COURT TRIAL SET FOR COMPLAINT (MEDIUM) OF CHALLENGE FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC., A MICHAEL M DEST,JUDGE CLERK: JENNIFER MEDINA NOT REPORTED COURT ATTENDANT C MIRAGLIA - APPEARANCES: SPECIAL APPEARANCE BY SUE KLUMP FOR PLAINTIFF. CHALLENGE FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC., A REPRESENTED BY LUIS VILLANGRANO. DEFENDANT ESTEBAN RODRIGUEZ-MORENO PRESENT SARAI RODRIGUEZ (INTERPRETER FOR DEFENDANT) PRESENT. - PROCEEDINGS: PREDISPOSITION HEARING HELD 05A*ADRTHLD. MATTER ELECTRONICALLY RECORDED 10:40 COURT CONVENES WITH ALL PARTIES PRESENT. WITNESS -- LUIS VILLAGRANO IS SWORN AND EXAMINED. WITNESS -- ESTEBAN RODRIGUEZ-MORENO IS SWORN AND EXAMINED. WITNESS -- SARAI RODRIGUEZ IS SWORN AND EXAMINED. PLAINTIFF REQUEST TO MOVE THE FILED CCP 98 DECLARATION INTO EVIDENCE. 10:51 (DEFENDANT REVIEWS CCP 98 DEC-OFF THE RECORD) 11:05 NO OBJECTION BY DEFENDANT. COURT MARKS AND ENTERS EXHIBITS ATTACHED TO DECLARATION THEREIN BY REFERENCE ONLY. AFTER TESTIMONY AND DUE CONSIDERATION BY THE COURT : - COURT FINDS: JUDGMENT ON COMPLAINT (MEDIUM) OF CHALLENGE FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC., A ORDERED AS FOLLOWS: JUDGMENT FOR CHALLENGE FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC., A JUDGMENT AGAINST ESTEBAN RODRIGUEZ-MORENO JUDGMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF: PRINCIPAL $10,703.01, INTEREST $3,636.00, ATTORNEY FEES $1,157.00, COSTS $529.42, AND DAMAGES $0.00. JUDGMENT TOTAL IS: $16,025.43 - PLAINTIFF TO PREPARE JUDGMENT. - HEARINGS: ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE : STATUS OF JUDGMENT AFTER COURT TRIAL SET FOR 02/15/17 AT 08:30 IN DEPARTMENT S17. ACTION - COMPLETE 11:10 CERTIFICATE OF ELECTRONIC RECORDING MONITOR PRINTED. === MINUTE ORDER END ===
Docket Event Miscellaneous Document Filed
PLAINTIFF'S WITNESS LIST FILED.
Docket Event DECLARATION RE: IN LIEU OF TESTIMPONY FILED BY CHALLENGE FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC., A
Docket Event Miscellaneous Document Filed
PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT LIST FILED.
Docket Event TRIAL BRIEF FILED BY CHALLENGE FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC., A
Docket Event Miscellaneous Document Filed
DEFT'S EXHIBIT LIST FILED.
See all events

Related Content in San Bernardino County

Case

Midland Credit Management Inc. -v- Vazquez Print
Jul 02, 2024 | David E Driscoll | Rule 3.740 Collections -Reduced Filing Fee Limited | Rule 3.740 Collections -Reduced Filing Fee Limited | CIVSB2421617

Case

Discover Bank -v- Aranguiz Print
Jul 03, 2024 | Donald Alvarez | Rule 3.740 Collections $10,000 or Less Limited | Rule 3.740 Collections $10,000 or Less Limited | CIVSB2421822

Case

Midland Credit Management Inc. -v- Fregoso et al Print
Jul 03, 2024 | Michael A Sachs | Rule 3.740 Collections $10,000.01 - $35,000 Limited | Rule 3.740 Collections $10,000.01 - $35,000 Limited | CIVSB2421661

Case

Absolute Resolutions Investments, LLC -v- Shaw Print
Jul 08, 2024 | Khymberli S Apaloo | Rule 3.740 Collections $10,000.01 - $35,000 Limited | Rule 3.740 Collections $10,000.01 - $35,000 Limited | CIVSB2422033

Case

JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. -v- Green Print
Jul 08, 2024 | Tanada, Stephanie | Rule 3.740 Collections $10,000.01 - $35,000 Limited | Rule 3.740 Collections $10,000.01 - $35,000 Limited | CIVSB2421987

Case

Jefferson Capital Systems, LLC -v- Bisceglia et al Print
Jul 08, 2024 | Jeffrey R Erickson | Rule 3.740 Collections $10,000 or Less Limited | Rule 3.740 Collections $10,000 or Less Limited | CIVSB2422004

Case

TD Bank Usa N.A. -v- Colunga Print
Jul 02, 2024 | Carlos Cabrera | Rule 3.740 Collections $10,000 or Less Limited | Rule 3.740 Collections $10,000 or Less Limited | CIVSB2421626

Case

Discover Bank -v- Newsome Print
Jul 08, 2024 | Jay H Robinson | Rule 3.740 Collections $10,000 or Less Limited | Rule 3.740 Collections $10,000 or Less Limited | CIVSB2422093

Case

Midland Credit Management, Inc. -v- Rios et al Print
Jun 28, 2024 | David E Driscoll | Rule 3.740 Collections -Reduced Filing Fee Limited | Rule 3.740 Collections -Reduced Filing Fee Limited | CIVSB2421214

Ruling

LVNV Funding, LLC vs Esther Canal An Individual
Jul 10, 2024 | 23CV-01524
23CV-01524 LVNV Funding, LLC v. Esther Canal Court Trial Appearance required. Parties who wish to appear remotely must contact the clerk of the court at (209) 725-4111 to seek permission and arrange for a remote appearance.

Ruling

ROCK CREEK CAPITAL, LLC VS NORMA S CARCAMO
Jul 11, 2024 | 23CHCV00264
Case Number: 23CHCV00264 Hearing Date: July 11, 2024 Dept: F47 Dept. F47 Date: 7/11/24 Case #23CHCV00264 MOTION TO DEEM REQUESTS FOR ADMISSIONS ADMITTED Motion filed on 4/4/24. MOVING PARTY: Plaintiff Rock Creek Capital, LLC RESPONDING PARTY: Defendant Norma S. Carcamo NOTICE: ok RELIEF REQUESTED : An order deeming the truth of matters specified in Plaintiffs Request for Admissions served on Defendant Norma S. Carcamo. RULING : The motion is granted. SUMMARY OF ACTION & PROCEDURAL HISTORY On 1/30/23, Plaintiff Rock Creek Capital, LLC (Plaintiff) filed this action against Defendant Norma S. Carcamo (Defendant) for breach of contract. On 4/4/23, Defendant, representing herself, filed an answer to the complaint. On 2/2/24, Plaintiff served Defendant, by U.S. Mail, with Requests for Admissions, Set 1. (Aguirre Decl., Ex.1). Defendant failed to serve responses. (Aguirre Decl.). Therefore, on 4/4/24, Plaintiff filed and served the instant motion seeking an order deeming the truth of matters specified in Plaintiffs Request for Admissions served on Defendant. Defendant has not opposed or otherwise responded to the motion. ANALYSIS Due to Defendants failure to respond to the Requests for Admissions, Plaintiff is entitled to an order deeming the matters admitted. CCP 2033.280(b), (c). CONCLUSION The motion is granted.

Ruling

BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. VS. XIONGYING CHEN
Jul 11, 2024 | CGC22601958
Matter on the Law & Motion calendar for Thursday, July 11, 2024, Line 5. PLAINTIFF BANK OF AMERICA, N.A.'s HEARING ON CLAIM OF EXEMPTION. The judgment debtor's claim of exemption is granted. (CCP 704.190.) For the 9:30 a.m. Law & Motion calendar, all attorneys and parties may appear in Department 302 remotely. Remote hearings will be conducted by videoconference using Zoom. To appear remotely at the hearing, go to the court's website at sfsuperiorcourt.org under "Online Services," navigate to "Tentative Rulings," and click on the appropriate link, or dial the corresponding phone number. Any party who contests a tentative ruling must send an email to contestdept302tr@sftc.org with a copy to all other parties by 4pm stating, without argument, the portion(s) of the tentative ruling that the party contests. The subject line of the email shall include the line number, case name and case number. The text of the email shall include the name and contact information, including email address, of the attorney or party who will appear at the hearing. If the court adopts the tentative ruling, it will execute a judicial council form of order reflecting the tentative. The court no longer provides a court reporter in the Law & Motion Department. Parties may retain their own reporter, who may appear in the courtroom or remotely. A retained reporter must be a California certified court reporter (CSR), for only a CSR's transcript may be used in California courts. If a CSR is being retained, include in your email all of the following: their name, CSR and telephone numbers, and their individual work email address. =(302/RBU)

Ruling

VANESA O'HANLON VS. TONY GARNICKI ET AL
Jul 11, 2024 | CGC23610527
Matter on the Law & Motion calendar for Thursday, July 11, 2024, Line 16. PLAINTIFF VANESA O'HANLON's Application And Hearing For Right To Attach Order And Writ Of Attachment. "Plaintiff's application for right to attach order and order for issuance of writ of attachment" is denied. This action regards a series of oral loans - several involving credit cards - that plaintiff allegedly made to defendant and he did not fully re-pay. The motion is denied for two principal reasons. First, the amount of plaintiff's claims is not "fixed or readily ascertainable." (CCP 483.010(a).) For example, plaintiff concedes she is "unable to locate my credit card statements to correctly charge" defendant. (O'Hanlon Dec. 3:1-3.) Second, plaintiff has not "established the probable validity" of her claims. (CCP 484.090(a)(2).) For example, plaintiff concedes the loans - all oral - began "in April 2017," raising serious statute-of-limitations issues. (O'Hanlon Dec. 1:25; CCP 339.) The court does not rely on defendant's untimely opposition for the above, but rather plaintiff's own declaration. For the 9:30 a.m. Law & Motion calendar, all attorneys and parties may appear in Department 302 remotely. Remote hearings will be conducted by videoconference using Zoom. To appear remotely at the hearing, go to the court's website at sfsuperiorcourt.org under "Online Services," navigate to "Tentative Rulings," and click on the appropriate link, or dial the corresponding phone number. Any party who contests a tentative ruling must send an email to contestdept302tr@sftc.org with a copy to all other parties by 4pm stating, without argument, the portion(s) of the tentative ruling that the party contests. The subject line of the email shall include the line number, case name and case number. The text of the email shall include the name and contact information, including email address, of the attorney or party who will appear at the hearing. Counsel for the prevailing party is required to prepare a proposed order which repeats verbatim the substantive portion of the tentative ruling and must email it to contestdept302tr@sftc.org prior to the hearing even if the tentative ruling is not contested. The court no longer provides a court reporter in the Law & Motion Department. Parties may retain their own reporter, who may appear in the courtroom or remotely. A retained reporter must be a California certified court reporter (CSR), for only a CSR's transcript msay be used in California courts. If a CSR is being retained, include in your email all of the following: their name, CSR and telephone numbers, and their individual work email address. =(302/RBU)

Ruling

ACE FUNDING SOURCE LLC VS AZIZI IMPORTS INC. D/B/A AZIZI IMPORTS, ET AL.
Jul 11, 2024 | 23STCP04480
Case Number: 23STCP04480 Hearing Date: July 11, 2024 Dept: 51 Tentative Ruling Judge Upinder S. Kalra, Department 51 HEARING DATE: July 11, 2024 CASE NAME: Ace Funding Source LLC v. Azizi Imports Inc. d/b/a Azizi Imports, et al. CASE NO .: 23STCP04480 MOTION TO AMEND SISTER STATE JUDGMENT DUE TO CLERICAL ERROR UNDER CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE § 473(d) MOVING PARTY : Plaintiff Ace Funding Source LLC RESPONDING PARTY(S): None as of July 8, 2024 REQUESTED RELIEF: 1. An Order amending the sister state judgment entered against Azizi Imports Inc. d/b/a Azizi Imports; Flyby Auto Transport LLC d/b/a Flyby Auto Transport; Oversight, LLC d/b/a Oversight; Flyby Auto Transport LLC; and Jonathan Azizi. TENTATIVE RULING: 1. Motion to Amend Sister-State Judgment due to Clerical Error is GRANTED. STATEMENT OF MATERIAL FACTS AND/OR PROCEEDINGS: On December 5, 2023, Plaintiff Ace Funding Source LLC (Plaintiff) filed an Application for Entry of Judgment on Sister-State Judgment (Application) against Defendants Azizi Imports Inc. d/b/a Azizi Imports; Flyby Auto Transport LLC d/b/a Flyby Auto Transport; Overight, LLC d/b/a Oversight; and Jonathan Azizi (Defendants). On December 12, 2023, the Clerk entered judgment. On April 22, 2024, Plaintiff filed notice of motion to amend the Sister-State Judgment. On May 13, 2024, the court continued the hearing on Plaintiffs motion to amend. On June 7, 2024, Plaintiff filed a memorandum of points and authorities and a declaration in support of its motion to amend the Sister-State Judgment. LEGAL STANDARD: Courts have inherent powers to correct judgments by a nunc pro tunc order where there has been a clerical error by clerk or by the judge himself, or where some provision of, or omission from, order or judgment was due to inadvertence, or mistake of court. ( Lane v. Superior Court of Siskiyou County (1950) 98 Cal App 2d 165, 219; Code Civ. Proc., § 473, subd. (d).) This includes clerical errors when made by an attorney who drafts the judgment. ( See In re Marriage of Kaufman (1980) 101 Cal.App.3d 147, 151.) However, while a trial court may correct clerical errors and misprisions in a judgment, it cannot amend a judgment once entered, if the error to be corrected is a judicial one, for instance if it embodies an intentional action of the court even though legally erroneous. ( Kamper v. Mark Hopkins, Inc. (1947) 78 Cal App 2d 885.) ANALYSIS : Plaintiff contends that Defendants Flyby Auto Transport LLC d/b/a Flyby Auto Transport, Oversight, LLC d/b/a Oversight, and Flyby Auto Transport LLC were not added to the courts docket due to a clerical error. Plaintiff further contends that these Defendants were listed in the Sister-State Judgment packet documents. Plaintiff seeks to have these Defendants added to the docket. Here, the court agrees there is a clerical error. The Judgment and Notice of Entry of Judgment entered on December 12, 2023 identify all Defendants. However, the courts docket only includes Defendants Azizi Imports Inc. d/b/a Azizi Imports and Jonathan Azizi. While Plaintiff does not seek revision of the documents themselves, Plaintiffs request is still proper because it is clearly a clerical error that the docket does not accurately reflect the entered Judgment. (Code Civ. Proc. § 183(3).) Accordingly, the court GRANTS Plaintiffs motion to amend. CONCLUSION: For the foregoing reasons, the Court decides the pending motion as follows: 1. Motion to Amend Sister-State Judgment due to Clerical Error is GRANTED. Moving party is to give notice. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: July 11, 2024 __________________________________ Upinder S. Kalra Judge of the Superior Court

Ruling

SAN FRANCISCO FEDERAL CREDIT UNION VS. YUON LAU ET AL
Jul 10, 2024 | CGC16553110
Matter on the Law & Motion calendar for Wednesday, July 10, 2024, Line 3. ASSIGNEE TK CREDIT RECOVERY's Motion To Add Defendant'S Alias And Non Debtor'S Spouse Name To Abstract Of Judgment. TK Credit Recovery's unopposed "motion to add defendant's alias and non-debtors spouse's name to abstract of judgment" is granted. For the 9:30 a.m. Law & Motion calendar, all attorneys and parties may appear in Department 302 remotely. Remote hearings will be conducted by videoconference using Zoom. To appear remotely at the hearing, go to the court's website at sfsuperiorcourt.org under "Online Services," navigate to "Tentative Rulings," and click on the appropriate link, or dial the corresponding phone number. Any party who contests a tentative ruling must send an email to contestdept302tr@sftc.org with a copy to all other parties by 4pm stating, without argument, the portion(s) of the tentative ruling that the party contests. The subject line of the email shall include the line number, case name and case number. The text of the email shall include the name and contact information, including email address, of the attorney or party who will appear at the hearing. Counsel for the prevailing party is required to prepare a proposed order which repeats verbatim the substantive portion of the tentative ruling and must email it to contestdept302tr@sftc.org prior to the hearing even if the tentative ruling is not contested. The court no longer provides a court reporter in the Law & Motion Department. Parties may retain their own reporter, who may appear in the courtroom or remotely. A retained reporter must be a California certified court reporter (CSR), for only a CSR's transcript may be used in California courts. If a CSR is being retained, include in your email all of the following: their name, CSR and telephone numbers, and their individual work email address. =(302/RBU)

Ruling

- ROCKY TOP RENTALS LLC vs STANLEY, ROBERT JASON
Jul 10, 2024 | CV-23-002760
CV-23-002760 - ROCKY TOP RENTALS LLC vs STANLEY, ROBERT JASON - Plaintiff's Application for Writ of Possession - DENIED, as MOOT, in view of entry of Defendants’ defaults on 6-24-24.

Ruling

SOCAL LIEN SOLUTIONS LLC VS GOODMAN SANTA FE SPRINGS SPE LLC
Jul 11, 2024 | 24NWCV00662
Case Number: 24NWCV00662 Hearing Date: July 11, 2024 Dept: C SOCAL LIEN SOLUTIONS LLC v. GOODMAN SANTA FE SPRINGS SPE LLC CASE NO.: 24NWCV00662 HEARING: 07/11/24 #6 Defendant GOODMAN SANTA FE SPRINGS SPE LLCs Demurrer to Plaintiffs Complaint is CONTINUED to Thursday, August 15, 2024 at 9:30 a.m. in Dept. SE-C . Moving Party to give notice. Defendant GOODMAN SANTA FE SPRINGS SPE LLC generally demurs to each cause of action contained in Plaintiffs Complaint. On June 26, 2024, before Plaintiffs Opposition to this Demurrer was due, Plaintiff filed and served a Notice of Errata intended to augment inadvertent errors in its complaint at Exhibit D. (Ntc. of Errata, 06/26/24.) It appears that this new Exhibit D intends to amend the initial pleading. A party may amend its pleading once without leave of court at any time before the answer, demurrer, or motion to strike is filed, or after a demurrer or motion to strike is filed but before the demurrer or motion to strike is heard if the amended pleading is filed and served no later than the date for filing an opposition to the demurrer or motion to strike. (emphasis added.) (CCP §472.) Although Plaintiff did not file, serve, or move for leave to file an amended pleading, it is well-settled that California recognizes a general rule of&liberal allowance of amendments& ( Nestle v. City of Santa Monica (1972) 6 Cal.3d 920, 939.) In the interests of judicial efficiency and in light of the liberal policy concerning amendments, the Court utilizes its discretion to grant Plaintiff leave to file a First Amended Complaint incorporating the new exhibit attached as Exhibit D to Plaintiffs Notice of Errata. Plaintiff is ORDERED to file and serve a First Amended Complaint within 5 days from the date of the Courts issuance of this Order. If the FAC is timely filed and served, the subject Demurrer will be taken off-calendar as MOOT on the continued hearing date. If the FAC is not timely filed and served, the Court will issue a ruling on this subject Demurrer, on the merits.

Document

Synchrony Bank -v- Barker Print
Jul 10, 2023 | Frangie, Janet | Rule 3.740 Collections $10,000 or Less Limited | Rule 3.740 Collections $10,000 or Less Limited | CIVSB2315851

Document

Oportun, Inc. -v- Velasco Print
Jul 10, 2023 | Lee, Corey | Rule 3.740 Collections $10,000 or Less Limited | Rule 3.740 Collections $10,000 or Less Limited | CIVSB2315553

Document

LVNV Funding LLC -v- Schraud et al Print
Jun 28, 2024 | . TBD | Rule 3.740 Collections -Reduced Filing Fee Limited | Rule 3.740 Collections -Reduced Filing Fee Limited | CIVSB2421299

Document

LVNV Funding LLC -v- Hernandez Print
Jul 01, 2024 | Carlos Cabrera | Rule 3.740 Collections $10,000 or Less Limited | Rule 3.740 Collections $10,000 or Less Limited | CIVSB2421327

Document

Portfolio Recovery Associates Llc -v- Villacis Print
Jul 01, 2024 | . TBD | Rule 3.740 Collections -Reduced Filing Fee Limited | Rule 3.740 Collections -Reduced Filing Fee Limited | CIVSB2421439

Document

Portfolio Recovery Associates Llc -v- Rook Print
Jul 01, 2024 | Michael A Sachs | Rule 3.740 Collections -Reduced Filing Fee Limited | Rule 3.740 Collections -Reduced Filing Fee Limited | CIVSB2421357

Document

TD Bank USA, N.A. -v- MCDonnell Print
Sep 01, 2022 | Gilbert, Ronald | Rule 3.740 Collections $10,000 or Less Limited | Rule 3.740 Collections $10,000 or Less Limited | CIVSB2219103

Document

Citibank N.a. -v- Brambila Print
Jul 02, 2024 | Wilfred J Schneider, Jr. | Rule 3.740 Collections $10,000 or Less Limited | Rule 3.740 Collections $10,000 or Less Limited | CIVSB2421677