US District Court for the District of Maine Other Statutes Cases
Cases 71 - 80 of 228
BLACK BEAR LLC v. WIT BEVERAGE COMPANY
as 2:2015cv00246
Plaintiff:
BLACK BEAR LLC
Defendant:
WIT BEVERAGE COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1051
JACKSON & MACNICHOL et al v. SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION et al
as 2:2015cv00154
Plaintiff:
JACKSON & MACNICHOL and FRANCIS M JACKSON
Defendant:
SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION and CAROLYN COLVIN ACTING COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1651
MARCOUX et al v. SUSAN J SZWED PA
as 2:2015cv00093
Plaintiff:
ALFRED MARCOUX and CHARLENE JONES
Defendant:
SUSAN J SZWED PA
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
MASON v. ANTHEM INC et al
as 2:2015cv00086
Plaintiff:
BRIAN MASON
Defendant:
ANTHEM INC , ANTHEM HEALTH PLANS OF MAINE INC and DOES 1-10
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1391
HARTFORD LIFE AND ANNUITY INSURANCE COMPANY v. BROWN et al
as 1:2014cv00504
Plaintiff:
HARTFORD LIFE AND ANNUITY INSURANCE COMPANY
Defendant:
DONALD E BROWN, JR, DIANE M FREEMAN, DONNA M MARQUIS and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1335
USA v. GALE
as 2:2014cv00490
Movant:
USA
Respondent:
LATIA GALE
Cause Of Action: Contempt Proceedings
FOGG et al v. OCWEN LOAN SERVICING LLC
as 2:2014cv00454
Plaintiff:
STANLEY FOGG and HELEN FOGG
Defendant:
OCWEN LOAN SERVICING LLC
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
PORTLAND CELLULAR PARTNERSHIP v. INHABITANTS OF THE TOWN OF CAPE ELIZABETH
as 2:2014cv00274
Plaintiff:
PORTLAND CELLULAR PARTNERSHIP
Defendant:
INHABITANTS OF THE TOWN OF CAPE ELIZABETH
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
VISIONMASTER INC v. ASC INTERNATIONAL
as 2:2014cv00224
Plaintiff:
VISIONMASTER INC
Defendant:
ASC INTERNATIONAL
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1125
SPICKLER v. GARDEN et al
as 2:2014cv00219
Plaintiff:
ROBERT D SPICKLER
Defendant:
GARDEN , DRUMMOND WOODSUM , EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS INC and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681
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.
