US District Court for the Central District of Illinois Other Statutes Cases
Cases 71 - 80 of 425
Ruot et al v. General Motors LLC et al
as 3:2018cv03200
Plaintiff:
Angela M. Ruot and Ryan D. Ruot
Defendant:
General Motors LLC and Landmark of Taylorville, Inc.,
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Riggen v. CU Recovery, Inc.
as 1:2018cv01243
Plaintiff:
Timothy Riggen
Defendant:
CU Recovery, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
Ashwill v. IC System Inc et al
as 2:2018cv02125
Plaintiff:
Mark Ashwill
Defendant:
IC System Inc and Sprint Corporation
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
Young v. GC Services Limited Partnership, et al.
as 1:2018cv01156
Plaintiff:
Rosa Young
Defendant:
GC Services Limited Partnership and John Does 1-25
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
Sears v. Hunter Warfield, Inc.
as 4:2018cv04079
Plaintiff:
Steven Sears
Defendant:
Hunter Warfield, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
Doe v. Illinois State University et al
as 1:2018cv01128
Plaintiff:
John Doe
Defendant:
Illinois State University, John M. Davenport, Levester Johnson and others
Cause Of Action: 20 U.S.C. § 1681
CMB Export, LLC. et al v. Atteberry et al
as 4:2018cv04050
Plaintiff:
CMB Export, LLC. and CMB Summit LLC, d/b/a CMB Regional
Defendant:
Kim Atteberry , Christopher Atteberry , Angelique Brunner and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1030
Kiefer v. Bob Evans Farms, LLC et al
as 1:2017cv01544
Plaintiff:
Emily Kiefer
Defendant:
Bob Evans Farms, LLC and Bob Evans Restaurants, LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Ashwill v. Tepper & Mann PC et al
as 2:2017cv02264
Plaintiff:
Mark Ashwill
Defendant:
Tepper & Mann PC and Midstate Collection Solutions Inc
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
Herrera v. City of Bloomington, Illinois et al
as 1:2017cv01450
Plaintiff:
Amanda Herrera
Defendant:
City of Bloomington, Illinois , Robert Yehl , Jeremy Haley and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
