Cases 51 - 60 of 93
In re: Maurice Nichol
as 17-1939
Defendant - Petitioner:
In re: MAURICE NICHOLS, a/k/a Michael Peterson
Plaintiff - Respondent:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Nominal Respondent:
MICHAEL M. BAYLSON
Peterson Manuel v. NRA Group LLC
as 17-1124
Plaintiff - Appellee:
PETERSON MANUEL
Defendant - Appellant:
NRA GROUP LLC
In re: Matthew Ballister, III
as 17-1114
Plaintiff - Petitioner:
In re: MATTHEW J. BALLISTER, III
Defendant - Respondent:
DETECTIVE SERGEANT JORGE JIMENEZ, DETECTIVE ROBERT HENDERSON, DETECTIVE SOFIA SANTOS and others
Debtor - Respondent:
MICHAEL HENN, Township of Union Municipal Court Prosecutor
Nominal Respondent:
ESTHER SALAS
In re: Maurice Nichol
as 16-4167
Defendant - Petitioner:
In re: MAURICE NICHOLS, a/k/a Michael Peterson
Plaintiff - Respondent:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Nominal Respondent:
MICHAEL M. BAYLSON
In re: Spencer Peterson
as 16-2955
Petitioner:
In re: SPENCER PETERSON
Respondent:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Kaul v. Christopher J. Christe, Esq. et al
as 2:2016cv02364
Plaintiff:
Richard Arjun Kaul
Defendant:
CHRISTOPHER J. CHRISTIE , STATE OF NEW JEREY , Jeffrey Chiesa, Esq. and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1961
Kaul v. Christopher J. Christe, Esq. et al
as 3:2016cv02364
Plaintiff:
Richard Arjun Kaul
Defendant:
Christopher J. Christe, Esq., STATE OF NEW JEREY, Jeffrey Chiesa, Esq. and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1961 Racketeering (RICO) Act
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION v. RVPLUS, INC. et al
as 2:2016cv01428
Plaintiff:
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Defendant:
RVPLUS, INC. and CARY LEE PETERSON
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 77
Edward Bukstel v. Jehu Hand, et al
as 15-3301
Plaintiff - Appellant:
EDWARD BUKSTEL
Defendant - Appellee:
JEHU HAND, DYLAN J. STEINBERG, JOHN S. STAPLETON and others
BUKSTEL v. HAND et al
as 2:2015cv03951
Plaintiff:
EDWARD BUKSTEL
Defendant:
JEHU HAND, DYLAN STEINBERG , JOHN STAPLETON and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 78
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.
