Cases 1 - 10 of 22
Shanishchara v. Model N, Inc. et al
as 3:2024cv02994
Plaintiff:
Kunal Shanishchara
Defendant:
Model N, Inc., Baljit Dail, Tim Adams and others
Jeffrey Davidoff v. Catherine Dail
as 2:2024cv02232
Plaintiff:
Jeffrey Davidoff
Defendant:
Catherine Dail, Catherine Dail an individual doing business as CDFA and DOES 1 through 25, inclusive
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
Copeland v. State of Alaska
as 3:2022cv00273
Petitioner:
Roger Dail Copeland, Sr.
Respondent:
State of Alaska
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Copeland v. Houser
as 3:2022cv00017
Petitioner:
Roger Dail Copeland, Sr.
Respondent:
Earl Houser
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Copeland v. Volland
as 3:2021cv00262
Plaintiff:
Roger Dail Copeland, Sr.
Defendant:
Phillip Volland
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Mark Edward Dail et al v. Keystone RV Company
as 2:2021cv02142
Plaintiff:
Mark Edward Dail and Patricia Carlyn Dail
Defendant:
Keystone RV Company and DOES 1-50, inclusive
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Jordan v. C.C.A.N. Financial, Inc. et al
as 2:2018cv01450
Defendant:
W. D. Bunch and C.C.A.N. Financial, Inc.
Plaintiff:
Dail M. Jordan
Cause Of Action: 23 U.S.C. § 1441
Jack et al v. Borg-Warner Morse Tec LLC et al
as 2:2017cv00537
Plaintiff:
Jack, Patrick Jack, Leslie Jack and others
Defendant:
Asbestos Corporation Ltd, CBS Corporation, Honeywell International Inc and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Asbestos Litigation
Peaches v. Colvin
as 3:2016cv08273
Plaintiff:
Darryl Dail Peaches
Defendant:
Carolyn W Colvin
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405
Margaret Keiper et al v. Victor Valley Transit Authority et al
as 5:2015cv00703
Defendant:
Dinorah Aguilar, Amston Supply, Inc., Does and others
Plaintiff:
Dail Keiper, Jr., Dail Keiper, Margaret Keiper and others
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.
