Search Federal District Court filings
Party Name (optional):
Cases Filed In:
Lawsuit Type:
Show:
Cases Filed:
and

Other Statutes - Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Cases filed in the New York Southern District Court before William H. Pauley III [ Court Info ]

Results 1 - 5 of 5
Parties District Court Judge Type of Lawsuit Cause of Action
July 13, 2009
Gilmore v. Gilmore et al NY Southern Pauley Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Racketeering (RICO) Act
Plaintiff: David Gilmore Defendant: Abby Gilmore, Arthur Freierman, Southbridge Financial Corp.
 
July 14, 2008
Lipin et al v. Lipin NY Southern Pauley Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Federal Question
Plaintiff: Theodore Lipin, Robert G. Lipin, Ann Susan Markatos; Defendant: Joan C. Lipin
 
March 5, 2008
Cintas Corporation et al v. Unite Here et al NY Southern Unassigned Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Racketeering (RICO) Act
Plaintiff: Cintas Corporation, Cintas Corporation No. 2, Cintas Corporation No. 3, Cintas Holdings LLC; Defendant: Unite Here, Change to Win, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Bruce Raynor, Ahmer Qadeer and others...
 
August 30, 2005
Actiive Glass Corp. v. Caldwell et al NY Southern Pauley Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Racketeering (RICO) Act
June 9, 2005
Penn et al v. JP Morgan Chase & Co. et al NY Southern Pauley Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Racketeering (RICO) Act
         
Featured Case Includes court opinions, orders, and all eFiling documents (complaint, responses, associated filings).
Opinions Available Includes court opinions & orders.
Add to your RSS Reader Add to your Google Add to your My Yahoo Add to your My MSN Add to your My AOL Add to your Feedster Add to your Newsgator Add to your Bloglines Add to your NewsBurst Add to your Rojo Add to your Pluck
The Justia Federal District Court Filings & Dockets site republishes public litigation records retrieved from the US Federal District Courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, and do not necessarily reflect the view of Justia.