Cases 71 - 80 of 112
Singh et al v. Washington Mutual Bank et al
as 3:2009cv02771
Plaintiff:
Peter Singh and Ansuiya Singh
Defendant:
Washington Mutual Bank, Washington Mutual Bank, Washington Mutual Bank and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1601 Truth in Lending
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2009cv02127
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692 Fair Debt Collection Act
Ezike v. Mittal et al
as 4:2008cv01867
Plaintiff:
Romeo Ezike
Defendant:
Lakshmi Mittal, DHL, Cook County Jail and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1961 Racketeering (RICO) Act
Sidhu et al v. Bardini et al
as 4:2008cv05350
Plaintiff:
Navjit Kaur Sidhu, Navjit Kaur Sidhu, Harjit Singh Sidhu and others
Defendant:
Emilia Bardini, Jonathan Scharfen, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services and others
Cause Of Action: U.S. Government Defendant
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2008cv04618
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Bohl et al v. The Charles Schwab Corporation et al
as 3:2008cv02984
Plaintiff:
R. Daniel Bohl, R. Daniel Bohl, Garfield Peate and others
Defendant:
The Charles Schwab Corporation, The Charles Schwab Corporation, Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. and others
Miscellaneou:
YieldPlus Investor Group
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2008cv01529
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Singh v. LSG Sky Chefs Inc. et al
as 3:2008cv01353
Plaintiff:
Sukh Deo Singh and Sukh Deo Singh
Defendant:
LSG Sky Chefs Inc., Walter Gehl and Mary Donnelly
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Ghuman v. Barrett et al
as 3:2007cv06505
Plaintiff:
Apramjeet Singh Ghuman
Defendant:
Robin Barrett, Rosemary Melville and United States Of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
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.
