Cases 1 - 10 of 130
George Sachs v. Ricardo Inc., et al
as 24-1468
Plaintiff:
GEORGE SACHS, dba Paradyme Systems USA
Defendant:
RICARDO INC., WESLEY SCHARMEN, PHILIP MICHAEL and others
George Sachs v. Ricardo Inc., et al
as 24-1420
Plaintiff:
GEORGE SACHS, dba Paradyme Systems USA
Defendant:
RICARDO INC., WESLEY SCHARMEN, PHILIP MICHAEL and others
Vines v. Calhoun County Sheriff Department et al
as 1:2024cv00323
Plaintiff:
George Taylor Carl Vines
Defendant:
Calhoun County Sheriff Department and Steven Hinkley
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Vining v. C.R. Bard, Inc. et al
as 2:2024cv00727
Plaintiff:
Brent Vining
Defendant:
C.R. Bard, Inc. and Davol, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Nessel v. Spicy Vines, LLC
as 1:2023cv01280
Plaintiff:
Dana Nessel
Defendant:
Spicy Vines, LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1367 Supplemental Jurisdiction
SouthState Bank, N.A. v. Vining Sparks Interest Rate Products, LLC
as 2:2023cv02698
Plaintiff:
SouthState Bank, N.A.
Defendant:
Vining Sparks Interest Rate Products, LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-(Citizenship)
Pryor v. Sixty Vines Nashville, LLC
as 3:2023cv00674
Plaintiff:
Jenna Pryor
Defendant:
Sixty Vines Nashville, LLC doing business as Sixty Vines
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201 Fair Labor Standards Act
USA v. Steven Vining, Jr.
as 23-1606
Plaintiff / Appellant:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant / Appellee:
STEVEN J. VINING, JR.
Norman v. Davidson Co. Sheriff's Office et al
as 3:2023cv00543
Plaintiff:
Tony Lee Norman
Defendant:
Davidson Co. Sheriff's Office, Pat l/n/u, Trinity Food Services and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Sachs v. Ricardo Inc. et al
as 5:2023cv10643
Plaintiff:
George Sachs and George Sachs Doing business as Paradyme Systems USA
Defendant:
Ricardo Inc., Wesley Scharmen, Philip Michael and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1442 Petition for Removal
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.
