Cases 31 - 40 of 65
Paragon Systems, Inc. v. Applied Integrated Technologies, Inc.
as 1:2018cv00458
Plaintiff:
Paragon Systems, Inc.
Defendant:
Applied Integrated Technologies, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Franchi v. Paragon Commercial Corporation et al
as 5:2017cv00591
Plaintiff:
Anthony Franchi
Defendant:
Paragon Commercial Corporation, Paragon Commercial Bank, Howard Jung and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 78
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 17-2363
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant - Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Womack v. Paragon Systems et al
as 3:2017cv00667
Plaintiff:
Geoffrey Lewis Womack
Defendant:
Paragon Systems, Kristen Elizabeth Grisanti and Pamela Reeves
Cause Of Action: Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2017cv00316
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2016cv00675
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
Fuentes v. Paragon Asset Recovery Services, Inc.
as 4:2016cv00153
Plaintiff:
Ruben A. Fuentes, Jr.
Defendant:
Paragon Asset Recovery Services, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 0227
United States of America v. The Real Property located at and near 2548 Remus Road, Charlotte, North Carolina 28203 et al
as 3:2016cv00685
Plaintiff:
United States of America
Defendant:
The Real Property located at and near 2548 Remus Road, Charlotte, North Carolina 28203 and The Leasehold held by Brookhill Village Two, LLC
Claimant:
Paragon Commercial Bank
Cause Of Action: Complaint for Forfeiture
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2015cv00769
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
NEAL v. PARAGON REVENUE GROUP
as 1:2015cv01047
Plaintiff:
CRYSTAL NEAL
Defendant:
PARAGON REVENUE GROUP
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681
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.
