Cases 31 - 40 of 78
Langley et al v. Smith Turf & Irrigation, LLC et al
as 3:2018cv00619
Defendant:
Wayne Smith, Jr, Smith Turf & Irrigation, LLC, Stephen E Smith and others
Plaintiff:
Gordon Langley, Paul Maull, IV and William A Powell
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
Rhyne, et al v. United States Steel Corporation, et al
as 3:2018cv00587
Plaintiff:
Carol Rhyne and Gordon E. Rhyne
Defendant:
CRC Industries, Inc., United States Steel Corporation, Sunoco, Inc. (R&M) and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Oppenheimer v. Storrow et al
as 1:2018cv00297
Defendant:
Joel Leslie Storrow, McGill Associates, P.A., WR-Martin, Inc. and others
Plaintiff:
David Gordon Oppenheimer and David Oppenheimer
Cause Of Action: 17 U.S.C. § 101
Banyan Licensing, L.C. v. Rathbun
as 3:2018cv00471
Defendant:
Gordon Rathbun
Plaintiff:
Banyan Licensing, L.C.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Pettit, Jr. v. Ditech Financial LLC et al
as 5:2018cv00035
Plaintiff:
William Gordon Pettit, Jr.
Defendant:
Ditech Financial LLC and Bank of America, N.A.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1452
Gordon v. Trustmark Insurance Company
as 3:2017cv00576
Plaintiff:
Miriam Gordon
Defendant:
Trustmark Insurance Company
Cause Of Action: Diversity-Breach of Contract
Oppenheimer v. Capstone Apartment Partners, LLC, et al
as 3:2017cv00110
Defendant:
Capstone Apartment Partners LLC and Brian D. Ford
Plaintiff:
David Gordon Oppenheimer
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1338
Prestwood v. Morigeau et al
as 3:2017cv00034
Plaintiff:
Ricky C. Prestwood
Defendant:
Michael Morigeau, Thomas F. Gordon and US Department of The Interior
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981
Hunter et al v. Dexcom, Inc. et al
as 3:2016cv00853
Plaintiff:
Gordon Hunter and Julia Bell Hunter
Defendant:
Dexcom, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1446
Casper v. USA
as 1:2016cv00122
Respondent:
USA
Petitioner:
Steven Gordon Casper
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
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.
