Cases 1 - 10 of 15
Alford v. J.C. Penney Corporation, Inc., et al.
as 4:2023cv00813
Plaintiff:
John R. Alford
Defendant:
J.C. Penney Corporation, Inc. and John Does 1 - 10
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment
Tatum v. Dollar Connect, LLC et al
as 6:2022cv00228
Plaintiff:
Justin Tatum
Defendant:
Dollar Connect, LLC, Lead Flash, LLC, Regency Marketing, LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment
Lee Compton v. John Does 1-10
as 4:2022cv00331
Plaintiff:
Lee Compton
Defendant:
John Does 1-10
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2022cv00092
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692 Fair Debt Collection Act
Lancaster et al v. Murray et al
as 4:2021cv00724
Plaintiff:
Kenneth A. Lancaster and Carol D. Lancaster
Defendant:
Nathan A. Murray, Stayko Dimitrov Staykov, Bradley Ward Edmondson and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1961
Whitehead v. Netflix Inc. et al
as 2:2018cv00460
Defendant:
John Does 1-10 and Netflix Inc.
Plaintiff:
David Whitehead
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2017cv00307
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2012cv00332
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2012cv00317
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2011cv00349
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Counter_claimant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Counter_defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681
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.
