ADAMS et al v. WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. et al, No. 5:2016cv00907 - Document 23 (E.D. Pa. 2017)
Court Description: OPINION/ORDER THAT THE MOTION OF DEFENDANT WELLS FARGO (DOC. NO. 12) IS GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. THE MOTION OF DEFENDANT WELLS FARGO (DOC. NO. 12) IS GRANTED AS TO COUNT I ONLY, AND DENIED IN ALL OTHER RESPECTS. THE MOTION OF DEFENDANT PHELAN (DOC. NO. 13) IS DENIED IN ITS ENTIRETY. SIGNED BY HONORABLE JEFFREY L. SCHMEHL ON 4/13/17. 4/13/17 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED. (ky, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
ADAMS et al v. WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. et al Doc. 23 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA FRANK ADAMS and CHRISTIE A. ADAMS, Ind. & as H/W, Plaintiffs, CIVIL ACTION NO. 16-0907 v. WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., and PHELAN, HALLINAN, DIAMOND & JONES LLP, formerly known as PHELAN, HALLINAN & SCHMIEG, LLP, Defendants. ORDER AND NOW, this 13th day of April, 2017, upon consideration of Defendant Wells Fargo’s Motion to Dismiss (Docket No. 12) and Defendant Phelan’s Motion to Dismiss (Docket No. 13), and all supporting and opposing papers, and for the reasons stated in the accompanying memorandum opinion, it is hereby ORDERED as follows: 1. The motion of Defendant Wells Fargo (Docket No. 12) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part; 2. The motion of Defendant Wells Fargo (Docket No. 12) is GRANTED as to Count I only, and DENIED in all other respects; 3. The motion of Defendant Phelan (Docket No. 13) is DENIED in its entirety. BY THE COURT: /s/ Jeffrey L. Schmehl Jeffrey L. Schmehl, J. Dockets.Justia.com
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
