Your case is unique, but you are not alone.

About 41,000 new cases are filed in U.S. courts every weekday. Behind each one is a person trying to understand what happens next. Here’s what the public record can tell you about this matter — and about the people deciding it.

  • Know your judge

    Every judge has a pattern — what they grant, what they deny, how they handle the kinds of motions your case will see.

  • Know your attorney

    See an attorney’s actual track record — case types, courts, and how they’ve performed in front of this judge before.

  • Know your court

    Every courthouse has its own rhythm — filing-to-resolution times, common dispositions, how often cases like yours settle.

Is this judge more likely to rule for the plaintiff or the defendant in cases of this type?

How has your attorney actually performed in front of this judge?

AICasePredict surfaces patterns from public court records. We don’t predict outcomes and we don’t recommend changing your attorney — that’s a conversation for you and them. We just show you what the record already says.

Full Analytics Report

  • Complete case narrative
  • Judge details and rulings
  • Case disposition and outcome
  • All docket entries
  • Related cases and filings
$20
One-time purchase
Photo of Cuyahoga County

Court

Cuyahoga County

Ohio

View Court Profile

Case Information

Filed 2025-03-24
Status INACTIVE
Type Consumer Debt
Docket 24 entries

Parties

Plaintiff Td Bank Usa Na As Successor In Interest To Target National Bank
Defendant Shari Adams
Photo of Hon. JOAN SYNENBERG

Judge

Hon. JOAN SYNENBERG

Cuyahoga County (OH)

Ohio

View Judge Profile

Lawyers

Docket Entries

  1. ASE FILED: COMPLAINT
  2. UDGMENT ENTRY(57620249) SENT BY REGULAR MAIL SERVICE. TO: SHARI ADAMS 582 E 106TH ST CLEVELAND, OH 44108
  3. UDGMENT ENTRY(57620248) SENT BY EMAIL. TO: RYAN S. MUDRA [email protected]
  4. UDGMENT ENTRY(57620247) SENT BY EMAIL. TO: RYAN S. MUDRA [email protected]
  5. UDGMENT ENTRY(57620246) SENT BY EMAIL. TO: DAVID A HEAD [email protected]
  6. UDGMENT ENTRY(57620245) SENT BY EMAIL. TO: DAVID A HEAD [email protected]
  7. ASE CALLED FOR DEFAULT HEARING ON 07/21/2025. PLAINTIFF APPEARED THROUGH COUNSEL. DEFENDANT, HAVING BEEN DULY SERVED WITH PROCESS, FAILED TO ANSWER OR OTHERWISE APPEAR IN THIS ACTION. FOR GOOD CAUSE SHOWN, PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT, FILED 06/30/2025, IS GRANTED. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED THAT DEFAULT JUDGMENT IS GRANTED IN FAVOR OF PLAINTIFF AND AGAINST DEFENDANT SHARI ADAMS IN THE AMOUNT OF $4,735.17, TOGETHER WITH POST-JUDGMENT INTEREST AT THE STATUTORY RATE PER ANNUM FROM THE DATE OF JUDGMENT (8.00%), PLUS COSTS OF THIS ACTION. COURT COSTS ASSESSED TO THE DEFENDANT(S). PURSUANT TO CIV.R. 58(B), THE CLERK OF COURTS IS DIRECTED TO SERVE THIS JUDGMENT IN A MANNER PRESCRIBED BY CIV.R. 5(B). THE CLERK MUST INDICATE ON THE DOCKET THE NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF ALL PARTIES, THE METHOD OF SERVICE, AND THE COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS SERVICE. NOTICE ISSUED
  8. OTICE FILED BY P1 TD BANK USA NA AS SUCCESSOR IN INTEREST TO TARGET NATIONAL BANK ATTORNEY DAVID A HEAD 0075201 NOTICE OF SUBMISSION
  9. FFIDAVIT FILED BY P1 TD BANK USA NA AS SUCCESSOR IN INTEREST TO TARGET NATIONAL BANK ATTORNEY DAVID A HEAD 0075201 MILITARY AFFIDAVIT
  10. HE COURT IS IN RECEIPT OF PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT, FILED 06/30/2025. THE DOCKET REFLECTS THAT SERVICE HAS BEEN PERFECTED, BUT DEFENDANT HAS FAILED TO ANSWER OR OTHERWISE RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CIVIL RULES. TELEPHONE DEFAULT HEARING SET FOR 07/21/2025 AT 11:00 AM. THE DEFAULT HEARING SHALL BE HELD BY PHONE. COUNSEL/PRO SE PARTIES TO CALL INTO THE FOLLOWING CONFERENCE LINE AT THE SCHEDULED TIME: DIAL-IN: (720)-527-5947 ACCESS CODE: 5692720# COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF(S) SHALL INFORM ALL OPPOSING COUNSEL AND UNREPRESENTED PARTIES OF THE DATE, TIME AND CONFERENCE CALL DIRECTIONS. BEFORE HEARING DATE, PLAINTIFF TO PROVIDE AN AFFIDAVIT OF DAMAGES, AN AFFIDAVIT OF MILITARY STATUS (NOT APPLICABLE TO CORPORATE DEFENDANTS), A PROPOSED JUDGMENT ENTRY, AND A COPY OF THE CORRESPONDENCE SENT TO DEFENDANT ADVISING OF THE DATE, TIME, AND LOCATION OF THE HEARING. NOTIFICATION SHALL BE MADE VIA REGULAR MAIL AND CERTIFIED MAIL, TO BE SENT NO LATER THAN (7) DAYS PRIOR TO HEARING DATE. FAILURE OF PLAINTIFF TO PROVIDE AFOREMENTIONED DOCUMENTS ON OR BEFORE THE HEARING DATE MAY RESULT IN A DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE PURSUANT TO CIV. R. 41(B). THE FAILURE OF DEFENDANT(S) TO APPEAR WILL RESULT IN A DEFAULT JUDGMENT. FAILURE OF PLAINTIFF TO APPEAR WILL RESULT IN DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE PURSUANT TO CIV. R. 41(B). NOTICE ISSUED
  11. OTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT
  12. HE DOCKET REFLECTS GOOD SERVICE ON DEFENDANT AND THAT DEFENDANT HAS FAILED TO TIMELY FILE AN ANSWER. PLAINTIFF IS TO FILE A MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT WITHIN 60 DAYS OF JOURNALIZATION OF THIS ORDER. FAILURE TO COMPLY MAY RESULT IN DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION PURSUANT TO CIV. R. 41(B). NOTICE ISSUED
  13. SPS RECEIPT NO. 56487365 DELIVERED BY USPS 04/01/2025 ADAMS/SHARI/ PROCESSED BY COC 04/09/2025.
  14. UMS COMPLAINT(56487365) SENT BY CERTIFIED MAIL. TO: SHARI ADAMS 582 E 106TH ST CLEVELAND, OH 44108
  15. UMMONS E-FILE COPY COST
  16. RIT FEE
  17. UDGE JOAN SYNENBERG ASSIGNED (RANDOM)
  18. EGAL RESEARCH
  19. EGAL NEWS
  20. EGAL AID
  21. OURT SPECIAL PROJECTS FUND
  22. OMPUTER FEE
  23. LERK'S FEE
  24. EPOSIT AMOUNT PAID RYAN S. MUDRA

See the patterns behind this case

The free view above tells you who’s in the room. The detailed reports below show how the room tends to behave — using the same public records lawyers quietly rely on before every hearing.

  • Judge Report

    How this judge has ruled in cases like yours — case mix, motion outcomes, and historical docket. Judges set the floor of what’s possible in your courtroom.

  • Attorney vs Judge Report

    Everything in the Judge Report, plus how your attorney has actually performed in front of this judge. Attorneys move you off the floor — or don’t.

One-time payment, no subscription. Reports describe past public court activity — they don’t predict outcomes and they aren’t legal advice.

Get Free Case Details

Enter your email to receive case information including parties, docket entries, and status updates.

By submitting you agree to our Privacy Policy.

Need this case removed? Enter your email above — the confirmation email includes a case removal link.

Legal Analytics Has Been Featured In

Featured in Forbes, Bloomberg, The New Yorker, Above The Law, American Bar Association, and more