D.C. Circuit Other Statutes Cases
Cases 1 - 10 of 16
CHAMPION v. SENDWELL, INC.
as 1:2024cv01143
Plaintiff:
JOSHUA CHAMPION
Defendant:
SENDWELL, INC.
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment
WALLERSTEIN v. YATES et al
as 1:2023cv03739
Not Classified By Court:
GREGORY WALLERSTEIN and MELVIN YATES
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment
SOBRIERAJ v. UNITED WOMEN'S HEALTH ALLIANCE
as 1:2023cv02128
Plaintiff:
KENNETH SOBRIERAJ
Defendant:
UNITED WOMEN'S HEALTH ALLIANCE
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment
BETZ v. COMCAST CABLE COMMUNICATIONS, LLC
as 1:2023cv01177
Plaintiff:
NA'EEM BETZ
Defendant:
COMCAST CABLE COMMUNICATIONS, LLC
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment
BETZ v. VIVE FINANCIAL, LLC.
as 1:2023cv01086
Plaintiff:
NA'EEM BETZ
Defendant:
VIVE FINANCIAL, LLC.
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment
CONNOR v. PRINCIPAL LAW GROUP L.L.P.
as 1:2023cv00438
Plaintiff:
JAY CONNOR
Defendant:
PRINCIPAL LAW GROUP L.L.P.
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment
Naeem Betz v. Howard University Hospital
as 23-7004
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Na'eem Betz
Defendant / Appellee:
Howard University Hospital
CHAMPION et al v. DOES
as 1:2022cv02697
Plaintiff:
JOSHUA CHAMPION and CHRISTINA JONES
Defendant:
DOES
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment
BETZ v. SYNCHRONY BANK
as 1:2022cv02235
Plaintiff:
NA'EEM BETZ
Defendant:
SYNCHRONY BANK
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment
BETZ v. HOWARD UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL
as 1:2022cv01578
Plaintiff:
NA'EEM BETZ
Defendant:
HOWARD UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment
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.
