Cases 1 - 7 of 7
Harold Felder v. Buonassissi, Henning & Lash, P
as 14-1649
Plaintiff - Appellant:
HAROLD E. FELDER and CHERRY A. FELDER
Defendant - Appellee:
BUONASSISSI, HENNING & LASH, P.C., JOSEPH VINCENT BUONASSISSI, II, RICHARD ELLIOTT HENNING, JR., d/b/a Richard Elliott Henning, Jr., Trustee, Attorney and others
Emmanuel Uzoma v. Barclays Bank, PLC
as 14-1630
Plaintiff - Appellant:
EMMANUEL UZOMA and EMELIA UZOMA
Defendant - Appellee:
BARCLAYS BANK, PLC, EQUIFIRST CORPORATION, BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON TRUST COMPANY, N.A. and others
felder et al v. Buonassissi, Henning & Lash, PC et al
as 8:2013cv01741
Plaintiff:
harold e. felder and cherry a. felder
Defendant:
Buonassissi, Henning & Lash, PC, joseph buonassissi, II, richard henning, jr. and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1601 Truth in Lending
Uzoma et al v. Barclays Plc et al
as 8:2013cv00977
Plaintiff:
Emmanuel Uzoma and Emelia Uzoma
Defendant:
Barclays Plc , Equifirst Corp. , The Bank of New York Mellon Trust Co. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal
Louis Marks, Jr. v. Deborah Cook
as 09-1053
Plaintiff - Appellant:
LOUIS A. MARKS, JR. and BRENDA JOYCE MARKS
Defendant - Appellee:
DEBORAH S. COOK, GREGORY L. COOK, WACHOVIA BANK, N.A. and others
Defendant:
PROFESSIONAL FORECLOSURE CORPORATION OF VIRGINIA, a/k/a Shapiro and Burson, LLP and ROBINHOOD ENTERPRISES
Louis Marks, Jr. v. Deborah Cook
as 09-1056
Plaintiff - Appellant:
LOUIS A. MARKS, JR. and BRENDA JOYCE MARKS
Defendant - Appellee:
DEBORAH S. COOK, GREGORY L. COOK, WACHOVIA BANK, N.A. and others
Defendant:
PROFESSIONAL FORECLOSURE CORPORATION OF VIRGINIA, a/k/a Shapiro and Burson, LLP and ROBINHOOD ENTERPRISES
Wilson v. Homeq Servicing Corporation et al
as 3:2008cv00162
Plaintiff:
Scott Wilson
Defendant:
Homeq Servicing Corporation, Arthur Q. Lyon, Tiffany & Bosco P.A. and others
Cause Of Action: Diversity
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.
