Missouri Other Statutes Cases
Cases 1 - 10 of 3,685
O'Hara V v. Fairbank
as 4:2024cv00503
Plaintiff:
Leon O'Hara V
Defendant:
Richard Fairbank
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
USA v. Gonzalez
as 6:2024cv03090
Plaintiff:
USA
Defendant:
Augustin Gonzalez
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 4246 Petition to Determine Present Mental Condition of Imprisoned Person
Doe v. ESA P Portfolio LLC et al
as 4:2024cv00491
Plaintiff:
Jane Doe
Defendant:
ESA P PORTFOLIO LLC, ESA P Portfolio Operating Lessee LLC, ESA P Portfolio MD Trust and others
USA v. Porter
as 6:2024cv03081
Plaintiff:
USA
Defendant:
Donte Porter
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 4245 Petition to Determine Mental Status of Prisoner
Jackson v. Universal Protection Services, LLC
as 5:2024cv06042
Plaintiff:
Joseph Jackson
Defendant:
Universal Protection Services, LLC doing business as Allied Universal Security Services, LLC
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681 Fair Credit Reporting Act
Schilling v. Internal Revenue Service et al
as 4:2024cv00204
Plaintiff:
Isabelle M Schilling
Defendant:
Internal Revenue Service, James Renno and Jake Bethurem
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2410 Quiet Title
Schilling v. Internal Revenue Service et al
as 4:2024cv00205
Plaintiff:
Isabelle M Schilling
Defendant:
Internal Revenue Service, James Renno and Jake Bethurem
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2410 Quiet Title
Cogent, Inc. v. Myers
as 5:2024cv06041
Plaintiff:
Cogent, Inc. doing business as Cogent Companies
Defendant:
Adam Kurt Myers
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1030 Computer Fraud and Abuse Act
USA v. Morris
as 6:2024cv03072
Plaintiff:
USA
Defendant:
Kendell Morris
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 4246 Petition to Determine Present Mental Condition of Imprisoned Person
USA v. Cerno
as 6:2024cv03054
Plaintiff:
USA
Defendant:
Matthew Cerno
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 4246 Petition to Determine Present Mental Condition of Imprisoned Person
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.
