Cases 1 - 10 of 44
US v. Griffin
as 24-1540
Defendant / Appellee:
UNITED STATES
Defendant:
DANIEL J. GRIFFIN
Interested Party:
US DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION and COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE
US v. Griffin
as 24-1541
Defendant / Appellee:
UNITED STATES
Defendant:
DANIEL J. GRIFFIN
Interested Party:
US DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION and COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE
TBL Lic LLC f/k/a Timberland Co & Subsidiaries v. Charles Rettig
as 22-1783
Petitioner / Appellant:
TBL LICENSING LLC, f/k/a Timberland Company, , and subsidiaries (a consolidated group)
Respondent / Appellee:
CHARLES P. RETTIG, Commissioner of Internal Revenue Service
Abdolrahim v. Rettig
as 22-1403
Petitioner / Appellant:
NITKA FATEMEH ABDOLRAHIM
Respondent / Appellee:
CHARLES P. RETTIG, Commissioner of Internal Revenue Service
Collins v. Rettig
as 22-1404
Petitioner / Appellant:
MELVIN COLLINS
Respondent / Appellee:
CHARLES P. RETTIG, Commissioner of Internal Revenue Service
US v. Ud Din
as 19-2198
Interested Party:
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE
Appellee:
UNITED STATES
Defendant / Appellant:
BURHAN UD DIN
Tavares v. IRS, et al
as 19-2144
Defendant / Appellee:
MASS HIRE, Tauton Adminstrator, DONALD MCENTIRE, HOUSE ADMINSTRATION COMMUNITY COUNSELING, of Bristol County CCBC and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
DANIEL D. TAVARES
US v. Grullon
as 19-1780
Interested Party:
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE
Appellee:
UNITED STATES
Defendant / Appellant:
FRANCISCO OSCAR GRULLON, a/k/a Frank
US v. Wolas
as 19-1154
Interested Party:
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, CECILY STURGE, SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION and others
Defendant / Appellant:
SCOTT J. WOLAS, a/k/a E.J.G., a/k/a D.P., a/k/a F.A., a/k/a E.A., a/k/a C.S.
Appellee:
UNITED STATES
US v. Pena Dominguez
as 17-1553
Appellee:
UNITED STATES
Defendant - Appellant:
GLADYS MARIA PENA DOMINGUEZ, a/k/a Gladys Pena
Interested Party:
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE
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.
