Cases 1 - 10 of 12
Clark v. Kohn Law Firm, S.C.
as 1:2023cv01432
Plaintiff:
John G Clark
Defendant:
Kohn Law Firm, S.C.
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681 Fair Credit Reporting Act
Jackson v. Goodwin et al
as 2:2023cv02007
Plaintiff:
Clarence Jackson
Defendant:
Mark Goodwin, First Financial Bank and Davis and Delanois Law Firm
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Olson v. Morrison et al
as 2:2021cv02315
Defendant:
Christen Morrison, Chris Morrison, Dana Morrison and others
Plaintiff:
Christopher T Olson
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1964
Hook, M.D. v. Rees et al
as 3:2021cv03270
Plaintiff:
C. Christopher Hook, M.D.
Defendant:
Sean Rees, Brandenburg-Rees & Rees and Brandenburg-Rees & Rees Law Firm
3Rd Party Defendant:
Frances L Hook-Hume
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Wabash Memorial Hospital Association Health and Welfare Plan et al v. McCartney et al
as 2:2021cv02257
Plaintiff:
Wabash Memorial Hospital Association Health and Welfare Plan and Jason Shannon
Defendant:
Daniel McCartney, Michelle McCartney, Monsees & Mayer P.C. and others
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1001
Federal Trade Commission v. AMG Services, Inc. et al
as 4:2017mc04002
Plaintiff:
Federal Trade Commission
Defendant:
AMG Services, Inc., Red Cedar Services, Inc., SFS, Inc. and others
Lockwood v. Foster et al
as 1:2016cv01196
Plaintiff:
Lloyd Benton Lockwood
Defendant:
Marth Jane Foster, Wilkins Insurance Agency, Foster Law Firm and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2016cv02017
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
Bayless v. The Katz Law Firm PC
as 3:2015cv03120
Plaintiff:
Jeff Bayless
Defendant:
The Katz Law Firm PC
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
Pugh v. The Katz Law Firm PC
as 2:2015cv02082
Plaintiff:
Patricia Pugh
Defendant:
The Katz Law Firm PC
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
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.
