Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Cases filed in the Fifth Circuit Courts
Cases 51 - 60 of 105
Albert Hill, III v. Tom Hunt, et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 14-10505
Plaintiff - Appellant: ALBERT G. HILL, III, Individually, and as a Beneficiary of the Margaret Hunt Trust Estate, derivatively on behalf of the Margaret Hunt Trust Estate, Individually, as a beneficiary of the Horoldson Lafayette Hunt Jr. Trust Estate and derivately on Behalf o
Defendant - Appellee: WILLIAM SCHILLING, Individually and In His Capacity as a Member of the Advisory Board MHTE and a Member of the Advisory Board of the HHTE, IVAN IRWIN, JR., ALBERT G. HILL, JR. and others
Type: Other Statutes RICO
Munck et al v. Dallas Lacrosse Academy, LLC et al
as 4:2014cv00173
Plaintiff: William A Munck , Suzanne T Munck and William P.J. Munck
Defendant: Dallas Lacrosse Academy, LLC , John A Marano , Kevin Barnicle and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1962
Corbett v. Phifer et al
as 5:2014cv00023
Defendant: Nan Riethmayer Phifer , Ura M. Riethmayer Family Trust , Estate of Ura M. Riethmayer and others
Plaintiff: William R Corbett
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1962
Namer v. Lahlou et al
as 2:2013cv06477
Defendant: R'Nelle Lahlou, Alvin Eisman, Naomi Eisman and others
Plaintiff: Robert Namer
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1961 Racketeering (RICO) Act
Albert Hill, III v. Tom Hunt, et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 13-10939
Plaintiff - Appellant: ALBERT G. HILL, III, Individually, and as a Beneficiary of the Margaret Hunt Trust Estate, derivatively on behalf of the Margaret Hunt Trust Estate, Individually, as a beneficiary of the Horoldson Lafayette Hunt Jr. Trust Estate and derivately on Behalf o
Defendant - Appellee: WILLIAM SCHILLING, Individually and In His Capacity as a Member of the Advisory Board MHTE and a Member of the Advisory Board of the HHTE, IVAN IRWIN, JR., ALBERT G. HILL, JR. and others
Intervenor - Appellee: CAMPBELL HARRISON & DAGLEY, L.L.P. and CALLOWAY, NORRIS, BURDETTE & WEBER, P.L.L.C.
Type: Other Statutes RICO
Bookman v. Seabreeze Financial LLC et al
as 4:2013cv02147
Plaintiff: Ronald Bookman
Defendant: Seabreeze Financial LLC, Kathleen Colt, Charles Long and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Bonds et al v. Modern Woodmen of America et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 3:2013cv00059
Plaintiff: Larry R. Bonds , Thomas C. Morrison , Joyce P. Morrison and others
Defendant: Modern Woodmen of America, W. Kenny Massey, George R. Worley and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Racketeering (RICO) Act
Andrews v. Dairy Farmers of America, Inc. We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 2:2011cv00097
Plaintiff: A.L. Boyd also known as Sonny doing business as B&B Dairy Farm, Jesse L. Andrews, Joe S. Andrews doing business as Andrews Dairy and others
Defendant: Dairy Farmers of America, Inc., Dean Foods Company, National Dairy Holdings, L.P. and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1962
Foley et al v. SAFG Retirement Services, Inc. et al
as 2:2013cv00017
Plaintiff: Harold Foley, III , Verlyn Foley , VOB Development, LLC and others
Defendant: SAFG Retirement Services, Inc. , SunAmerica Housing Fund 1517 , SunAmerica Housing Fund 1534 and others
Intervenor: Maumas Partners, LP and Aaron, PLC
Cross_claimant: Roile Jefferson
Cross_defendant: Harold Foley, III , Verlyn Foley and VOB Development, LLC
Counter_claimant: Roile Jefferson and Peter Britton
Counter_defendant: SAFG Retirement Services, Inc. , SunAmerica Affordable Housing Partners, Inc. , SA Affordable Housing, LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1961 Racketeering (RICO) Act
Nathan Smith v. State of Texas, et al
as 12-20819
Plaintiff - Appellant: NATHAN SMITH
Defendant - Appellee: STATE OF TEXAS, LAW OFFICE OF SCHWARTZ JUNNELL GREENBERG AND OATOUT ESQ, DICK SCHWARTZ, Esquire (personal and individual capacity) and others
Type: Other Statutes RICO

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.


Why Is My Information Online?