Cases 1 - 10 of 10
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2016cv50192
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681
Rowe et al v. Village of Oak Lawn et al
as 1:2008cv05684
Plaintiff:
James Rowe and Eugene Miller, Jr.
Defendant:
Village of Oak Lawn, Scott O'Neill, Does #1-#7 and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2008cv04111
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Miller v. Ormond et al
as 1:2008cv03181
Plaintiff:
Eugene Miller, Eugene Miller and Eugene Miller
Defendant:
John Ormond, Rebecca Garcia and City of Chicago
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2008cv02321
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2008cv02300
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Miller v. Voss et al
as 1:2008cv01458
Plaintiff:
Eugene Miller, Eugene Miller and Eugene Miller
Defendant:
John S. Voss, E. A. Lewis and City of Chicago
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Miller v. Gaffney et al
as 1:2008cv01420
Plaintiff:
Eugene Miller, Eugene Miller and Eugene Miller
Defendant:
Officer Gaffney, Officer Emily Byrnes and The City of Chicago
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Miller v. America's Best Contacts & Eyeglasses, Inc.
as 1:2007cv04920
Plaintiff:
Eugene Miller, Jr.
Defendant:
America's Best Contacts & Eyeglasses, Inc., America's Best Contacts & Eyeglasses, Inc. and America's Best Contacts & Eyeglasses, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Fraud
Roche v. Comerica Bk, et al
as 1:2002cv02055
Plaintiff:
Patrick R Roche
Defendant:
Comerica Bank, Eugene Miller, Kathryn Williams and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
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.
