Cases 1 - 10 of 18
Noel v. Romelus, et al
as 23-2058
Plaintiff:
ARNOLD A. NOEL, on behalf of himself and A.G.N. and B.M.N.
Defendant:
BARTHINE ROMELUS, PAUL M. CRONAN, BRAILEY E. NEWTON and others
Harman v. Wichland et al
as 1:2022cv00396
Plaintiff:
Walker G Harman, Sr. and Walker G. Harman, Sr.
Defendant:
Robert Wichland and Richard Pendergast
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Fraud
HUNT v. HUNT et al
as 2:2020cv00160
Defendant:
JANE A TRUDEAU and THOMAS W HUNT, JR
Plaintiff:
THOMAS W HUNT, SR
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Goodman v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
as 1:2017cv00199
Plaintiff:
Brian J. Goodman, Sr.
Defendant:
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
Holzworth v. Samsung Electronics America, Inc. et al
as 1:2017cv10529
Plaintiff:
Dale Holzworth, Sr.
Defendant:
Samsung Electronics America, Inc. and Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Davis v. Trafecante Lamboy et al
as 4:2015cv13852
Plaintiff:
Michael Joseph Davis, Sr.
Defendant:
Jimmy Trafecante Lamboy and Mr. Diamontopoulos
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Davis v. Department of Revenue et al
as 1:2015cv13856
Plaintiff:
Michael Joseph Davis, Sr.
Defendant:
Department of Revenue and Mr. Diamontopoulos
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2671
Davis v. Department of Revenue et al
as 4:2015cv13856
Plaintiff:
Michael Joseph Davis, Sr.
Defendant:
Department of Revenue and Mr. Diamontopoulos
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1446
Sweet Jr. et al v. Thomas III et al
as 1:2015cv00259
Plaintiff:
Kevin E. Sweet Jr. and Kevin E. Sweet Sr.
Defendant:
Anthony Thomas III, Anthony Thomas Jr., T & E Investments, LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1601
Sweet, Jr. v. Pizem, et al
as 14-2286
Plaintiff:
KEVIN E. SWEET, SR.
Plaintiff - Appellant:
KEVIN E. SWEET, JR.
Defendant - Appellee:
CHAIM PIZEM and T&E INVESTMENTS, LLC
Defendant:
ANTHONY E. THOMAS, III
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.
