Cases 41 - 50 of 84
LAKOWITZ v. SQUARE 1 FINANCIAL, INC.
as 1:2015cv00371
Defendant:
SQUARE 1 FINANCIAL, INC., DOUGLAS H. BOWERS, SUSAN G. CASEY and others
Plaintiff:
DAVID LAKOWITZ
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 78
BALAL SERVICES TRUST v. STACEY et al
as 1:2015cv00046
Plaintiff:
BALAL SERVICES TRUST
Defendant:
WILLIAM CLIFTON STACEY, SR., FREIDA B STACEY and UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Cross_claimant:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Cross_defendant:
FREIDA B STACEY and WILLIAM CLIFTON STACEY, SR.
Counter_claimant:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Counter_defendant:
BALAL SERVICES TRUST
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
TAE KWON DO & HAPKICO MARTIAL ARTS, LLC et al v. BANK OF NORTH CAROLINA
as 1:2015cv00028
Plaintiff:
TAE KWON DO & HAPKICO MARTIAL ARTS, LLC , MISAEL AVILES URIBE , LIA WILLIAMS and others
Defendant:
BANK OF NORTH CAROLINA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1446
TAY v. OBAMA et al
as 1:2014cv00802
Plaintiff:
TAY
Defendant:
BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA, MARISSA PISARICK, RANDOLPH NAOMI and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1962
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT v. BRITT
as 1:2014mc00048
Plaintiff:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
Defendant:
WILLIAM S. BRITT
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2014cv00278
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT v. MCKENY
as 1:2014mc00016
Plaintiff:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
Defendant:
WILLIAM TRIPPE MCKENY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT v. SHELL
as 1:2014mc00013
Plaintiff:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
Defendant:
WILLIAM ROBERT SHELL
WILLIAMS v. WILLIAMS
as 1:2013cv00985
Plaintiff:
SHAYLA HIGGINBOTHAM WILLIAMS
Defendant:
ANDRE WILLIAMS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
BLACK v. THE UNITED STATES ARMY et al
as 1:2013cv00889
Plaintiff:
WILLIAM REID BLACK
Defendant:
THE UNITED STATES ARMY, ARMY REVIEW BOARD AGENCY, PULSON and others
Cause Of Action: 10 U.S.C. § 1552
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.
