Cases 1 - 10 of 103
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2024cv00206
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
Tom Hensiek, et al v. Board of Directors of Casino Queen Holding Company, et al
as 24-8007
Petitioner:
TOM HENSIEK, JASON GILL and LILLIAN WROBEL
Respondent:
BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF CASINO QUEEN HOLDING COMPANY, INC., CHARLES BIDWILL, III, JAMES G. KOMAN and others
Robert Hamilton v. Lizzie Tegels
as 23-3245
Applicant:
ROBERT L. HAMILTON
Respondent:
LIZZIE TEGELS, Warden
USA v. Anthony Hamilton
as 23-3107
Plaintiff / Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant / Appellant:
ANTHONY HAMILTON
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2023cv00078
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681 Fair Credit Reporting Act
USA v. Lemarkus Hamilton
as 22-2763
Plaintiff / Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant / Appellant:
LEMARKUS HAMILTON
WEINSCHENK v. UNITED STATES et al
as 1:2022cv01150
Plaintiff:
CHARLES WEINSCHENK
Defendant:
STATE OF INDIANA, ERIC HOLCOMB, SUZANNE CROUCH and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 2333 Civil Remedies: Anti-Terrorism Act of 1991
Sir Finance Corp. v. Hamilton et al
as 1:2022cv02478
Plaintiff:
Sir Finance Corp.
Defendant:
Diondra Hamilton
Garnishee:
U.S. Department of Commerce
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1442 Petition for Removal
TURNER v. HAMILTON COUNTY TRUSTEE ASSOCIATION
as 1:2022cv00275
Plaintiff:
KEITH TURNER
Defendant:
HAMILTON COUNTY TRUSTEE ASSOCIATION and WESTFIELD WASHINGTON TOWNSHIP
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Charles Weinschenk v. Dustin Dixon, et al
as 21-2822
Plaintiff / Appellant:
CHARLES R. WEINSCHENK
Defendant / Appellee:
DUSTIN DIXON, COMMUNITY HEALTH NETWORK, INC., HAMILTON COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT and others
Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and CITY OF NOBLESVILLE
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.
