Cases 41 - 50 of 61
Beattie R. Ashmore v. Michael Thoma
as 11-1642
:
In re: BEATTIE BALENTINE ASHMORE
Plaintiff:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Appellee:
BEATTIE BALENTINE ASHMORE, Receiver
Respondent - Appellant:
MICHAEL THOMAS and CAROLYN THOMAS
Respondent:
MARCY MCQUEEN, CHARLES MCQUEEN, LISA MCQUEEN and others
Movant:
TONY B. POUGH, JOSEPH BERNARD BRUNSON, TIMOTHY MCQUEEN and others
Party-in-Interest:
WELLS FARGO BANK NA
Beattie Ashmore v. Michael Thoma
as 11-1265
:
In re: BEATTIE BALENTINE ASHMORE
Plaintiff:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Appellee:
BEATTIE BALENTINE ASHMORE, Receiver
Respondent - Appellant:
MICHAEL THOMAS and CAROLYN THOMAS
Respondent:
MARCY MCQUEEN, CHARLES MCQUEEN, LISA MCQUEEN and others
Movant:
TONY B. POUGH, JOSEPH BERNARD BRUNSON, TIMOTHY MCQUEEN and others
Party-in-Interest:
WELLS FARGO BANK NA
US v. John Kang
as 11-4307
Plaintiff - Appellant:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Party-in-Interest:
BEATTIE BALENTINE ASHMORE and ALBERT PETER SHAHID, JR.
Defendant - Appellee:
JOHN H. KANG and JOHN P. SESSIONS
Walters et al v. McMahen et al
as 1:2011cv00751
Plaintiff:
Bizzie Walters , Annie Hodge , Annette Baldwin and others
Defendant:
Todd McMahen , Tol Dozier , Nancy Hollis and others
Movant:
Perdue Farms Incorporated
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1961
United States Of America v. Brunson et al
as 7:2011mc00003
Receiver:
Beattie B. Ashmore
Defendant:
Joseph B Brunson, Timothy McQueen and Tony Pough
Plaintiff:
United States Of America
In Re Three Hebrew Boys
as 2:2011mc00016
Receiver:
Beattie B. Ashmore
USA v. 2007R00845
as 1:2011mc00056
Plaintiff:
USA
Defendant:
2007R00845
Receiver:
Beattie B. Ashmore
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 754
v. In Re: Receiver Beattie B. Ashmore Re: Three Hebrew Boys
as 5:2011mc00012
Receiver:
Beattie B. Ashmore
In re: Beattie B. Ashmore appointed as Receiver fro Three Hebrew Boys
as 3:2011mc00005
Receiver:
Beattie B. Ashmore
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.
