Cases 31 - 35 of 35
Modena v. United States Department of Justice et al
as 1:2009cv00534
Plaintiff:
Michael John Modena
Defendant:
United States Department of Justice, United States of America, Margaret Chiara and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1964 Racketeering (RICO) Act
Thompson v. California, State of et al
as 2:2008cv14389
Plaintiff:
Gerry Louis Thompson
Defendant:
California, State of, United States Post Office and United States of America
Cause Of Action: No cause code entered
United States v. Gash et al
as 3:2008cv00126
Plaintiff:
United States
Defendant:
Barry Gash and Scott Cox
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Fite v. United States of America et al
as 4:2007cv01307
Plaintiff:
Christopher Eric Fite
Defendant:
United States of America, Internal Revenue Service, Social Security Administration and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1961 Racketeering (RICO) Act
Liberte Capital Group, LLC et al v. Capwill et al
as 5:1999cv00818
3Rd Party Plaintiff:
Janet E. Mohnkern, CWN Group, Alpha Capital Group, LLC and others
Defendant:
Integrity Partners Management, LLC, Solon Improvements, William T. Wuliger and others
Petitioner:
United of Omaha Life Insurance Company, KeyBank National Association, University Club of Cleveland, Inc. and others
3Rd Party Defendant:
Richard Jamieson, Summit Street Partners, R.J. Properties and others
Intervenor Defendant:
Victor M Javitch
Interested Party:
Mark Reinholtz, Martha D. Sechman, Michael J. Schneider and others
Intervenor Plaintiff:
Andrew J. Capwill, Quindara R. Chillson, Johnny Mize and others
Counter Defendant:
Larry L. Thompson, Angelo Salcedo and Ursula Linke
Counter Claimant:
Washington Square Securities, Inc. and Victor Javitch
Intervenor:
Star Bank National Association, C.M. Life Insurance Company and Liberty Bank, N.A.
Plaintiff:
Leila F. Gregoire and Liberte Capital Group, LLC
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1962
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.
