District Court Cases in North Carolina
Cases 51 - 60 of 87,355
Vila v. Fashivly, Inc.
as 3:2024cv00453
Plaintiff:
Carlos Vila
Defendant:
Fashivly, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 17 U.S.C. § 501 Copyright Infringement
WESTBROOOK v. ADT SOLAR, LLC
as 1:2024cv00377
Plaintiff:
ROBERT WESTBROOK
Defendant:
ADT SOLAR, LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Contract Dispute
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv00376
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Pavkovich v. USA
as 5:2024cv00117
Petitioner:
Jeffrey Ben Pavkovich
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate Sentence
Costa et al v. White
as 4:2024cv00067
Plaintiff:
Valeria Cesanelli
Petitioner:
Romeo Mathew Costa
Defendant:
James Joseph White
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1330 Breach of Contract
Montgomery v. Kelly
as 5:2024hc02091
Petitioner:
Louvertis Kayonne Montgomery
Respondent:
Warden Lynne B. Kelly
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Whitaker v. O'Malley
as 5:2024cv00263
Plaintiff:
Leslie Whitaker
Defendant:
Martin O'Malley
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 206 Social Security Benefits
Carpenter v. Commissioner of Social Security
as 1:2024cv00137
Plaintiff:
Christopher A. Carpenter
Defendant:
Commissioner of Social Security
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 416 Denial of Social Security Benefits
WEST BEND MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY v. PRO PLUMBING SERVICES, LLC et al
as 1:2024cv00378
Plaintiff:
WEST BEND MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY
Defendant:
PRO PLUMBING SERVICES, LLC, CAMERON JAMES MOLTICH and JOANNA L. LEEDS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Declaratory Judgment
TERRY v. STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
as 1:2024cv00385
Petitioner:
DOYLE KENT TERRY
Respondent:
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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.
