Cases 1 - 10 of 57
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2024cv08292
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692 Fair Debt Collection Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2024cv08034
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692 Fair Debt Collection Act
Welsh v. EQRx, Inc. et al
as 1:2023cv01184
Plaintiff:
Kevin Welsh
Defendant:
EQRx, Inc., Alexis Borisy, Amy Abernethy and others
Moore v. EQRx, Inc. et al
as 1:2023cv01179
Plaintiff:
Jon Moore
Defendant:
EQRx, Inc., Alexis Borisy, Amy Abernethy and others
Friedrich Lu v. Jane Young, et al
as 23-2496
Plaintiff / Appellant:
FRIEDRICH LU
Defendant / Appellee:
JANE E. YOUNG, JOE H. TUCKER, JR., LESLIE M. GREENSPAN and others
Defendant:
WALTER T. MITCHELL, JAHAD HASAN, ERIC T. DONOVAN and others
Friedrich Lu v. Jane Young, et al
as 23-1845
Plaintiff / Appellant:
FRIEDRICH LU
Defendant:
JANE E. YOUNG, BISOLA OJIKUTU, TIMOTHY J. HARRINGTON and others
Defendant / Appellee:
JOE H. TUCKER, JR., LESLIE M. GREENSPAN, TUCKER LAW GROUP LLC and others
LU v. YOUNG et al
as 2:2023cv01239
Plaintiff:
FRIEDRICH LU
Defendant:
JANE E. YOUNG, JOE H. TUCKER, JR, LESLIE MILLER GREENSPAN and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1964 Racketeering (RICO) Act
SCHUMACHER v. BETTA et al
as 3:2022cv06167
Plaintiff:
PAUL R.F. SCHUMACHER
Defendant:
CHARLES BETTA and GEOFFREY HORN
HAREMZA et al v. JOHN DOES 1-15 et al
as 3:2022cv00043
Plaintiff:
MARY HAREMZA and JACOB MURRAY
Defendant:
JOHN DOES 1-15, AANIIIH NAKODA FINANCE, LLC doing business as BRIGHT LENDING, TERRY BROCKIE and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1962 Racketeering (RICO) Act
Adrian GuilleIn re: Adrian Guille
as 21-2842
Petitioner:
In re: ADRIAN GUILLE
Defendant:
STEVEN JOHNSON, RAYMOND ROYCE, SEARS and others
Respondent:
DAVID RICHARDS, AMY EMRICH, S. PATTERSON and others
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.
