Cases 1 - 10 of 11
ACCIDENT INSURANCE COMPANY v. DONALD BOWLES INC et al
as 4:2015cv00036
Plaintiff:
ACCIDENT INSURANCE COMPANY
Defendant:
DONALD BOWLES INC, DONALD BOWLES, ALL TERRAIN GRADING AND SEPTIC LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2201
BAJA FOOD SERVICES S. DE RL DE DV et al v. PEANUT BUTTER & CO INC
as 4:2015mc00002
Plaintiff:
BAJA FOOD SERVICES S. DE RL DE DV
Defendant:
PEANUT BUTTER & CO INC
Movant:
VICKIE BOWLES
KENNEDY v. AMF Bowling Centers Inc
as 4:2013cv00399
Plaintiff:
SANDRA KENNEDY
Defendant:
AMF Bowling Centers Inc
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2012cv00083
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
Meadows v. AMF Bowling Centers Inc
as 1:2011cv00109
Plaintiff:
VICTOR MEADOWS
Defendant:
AMF Bowling Centers Inc
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Jones et al v. AMF Bowling Centers Inc
as 4:2010cv00005
Plaintiff:
Sherry Ann Jones and Alan Lee Jones
Defendant:
AMF Bowling Centers Inc and AMF Bowling Centers Inc
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Personal Injury
Bowles v. Martin
as 4:2009cv00058
Plaintiff:
Jesse G. Bowles, III. and Jesse G. Bowles, III.
Defendant:
Dawn H Martin and Dawn H Martin
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Fraud
Bradley v. Sean et al
as 4:2008cv00125
Plaintiff:
Theresa Bradley
Defendant:
Russell Sean, Rus Drew, George Stanton and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Arnold v. Bowles et al
as 5:2008cv00258
Plaintiff:
Jessie L. Arnold
Defendant:
Theodore Archie Bowles, Houston County Medical Center, Georgia Composite State Board of Medical Examiners and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Sewell v. Bowles et al
as 4:2007cv00169
Plaintiff:
Willie Mark Sewell, Jr.
Defendant:
Jesse G. Bowles, III., Carol Etheridge, Melissa Shivers and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Fraud
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.
