Cases 1 - 10 of 11
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2021cv02305
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2020cv02314
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
IN RE: MOTION TO QUASH SUBPOENA ISSUED TO NON-PARTY SIMON PROPERTY GROUP, INC. IN CELLAIRIS FRANCHISE, INC. AND GLOBAL CELLULAR, INC. V. MICHAEL DUARTE, CIVIL ACTION FILE NO. 2:15-CV-00101-WCO (N.D.GA
as 1:2017mc00007
In Re:
IN RE: MOTION TO QUASH SUBPOENA ISSUED TO NON-PARTY SIMON PROPERTY GROUP, INC. IN CELLAIRIS FRANCHISE, INC. AND GLOBAL CELLULAR, INC. V. MICHAEL DUARTE, CIVIL ACTION FILE NO. 2:15-CV-00101-WCO (N.D.GA and SIMON PROPERTY GROUP, INC.
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BOARD OF MARION COUNTY, INDIANA et al
as 1:2016mc00077
Petitioner:
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BOARD OF MARION COUNTY, INDIANA, PATRICK EARLY, ROBERT GRAND and others
Interested Party:
BREN SIMON
Respondent:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2016cv02597
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692 Fair Debt Collection Act
IN RE: MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER
as 1:2016mc00042
Petitioner:
KEVIN BOWER, FAEGRE BAKER DANIELS LLP, PACERS BASKETBALL LLC and others
In Re:
MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER
Respondent:
BREN SIMON and UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Cause Of Action: No cause code entered
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. SIMONE
as 1:2014mc00081
Respondent:
DANIEL SIMONE
Petitioner:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
IN RE: FAILURE TO COMPLY
as 1:2012mc00053
In Re:
FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION REQUIREMENTS AND/OR NONPAYMENT OF ATTORNEY REGISTRATION FEES
Respondent:
PHILIP LYNN CARSON, EDWIN HENRY FISHER, JR., TODD EDWIN HAINES and others
SIMON PROPERTY GROUP, INC. v. PALOMBARO
as 1:2010mc00149
Defendant:
MARK M. PALOMBARO
Plaintiff:
SIMON PROPERTY GROUP, INC.
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.
