Cases 31 - 40 of 85
Shanika Day, et al v. Franklin Wooten, et al
as 19-1930
Plaintiff / Appellee:
SHANIKA DAY, individualy, and as the Administrator for the ESTATE OF TERRELL DAY and HARVEY MORGAN
Defendant / Appellant:
RANDALL DENNY and FRANKLIN WOOTEN, Sergeant
Federal Trade Commission v. Day Pacer LLC et al.
as 1:2019cv01984
Defendant:
Edutrek L.L.C, David Cumming, Raymond Fitzgerald and others
Plaintiff:
Federal Trade Commission
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 0045
Bryant Day v. Steve Kallis
as 19-1416
Petitioner / Appellant:
BRYANT K. DAY
Respondent / Appellee:
STEVE KALLIS, Warden
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2018cv00450
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2017cv00952
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
LABORERS' PENSION FUND et al v. J.J. DAY, INC.
as 1:2017mc00064
Defendant:
J.J. DAY, INC.
Plaintiff:
JAMES S. JORGENSEN, LABORERS' PENSION FUND and LABORERS' WELFARE FUND OF THE HEALTH AND WELFARE DEPARTMENT OF THE CONSTRUCTION AND GENERAL LABORERS' DISTRICT COUNCIL OF CHICAGO AND VICINITY
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2017cv05067
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
United States of America v. Priority 2nd Day package bearing tracking no. 9505500030787132000366
as 1:2017mc00247
Plaintiff:
United States of America
Defendant:
Priority 2nd Day package bearing tracking no. 9505500030787132000366
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2017cv03069
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
JAMGOTCHIAN et al v. INDIANA HORSE RACING COMMISSION et al
as 1:2016cv02344
Defendant:
STANLEY BOWKER, TIM DAY, KEVIN GREELY and others
Plaintiff:
JERRY JAMGOTCHIAN and ERIC REED
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
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.
