Cases 11 - 19 of 19
Bomberger v. Hanson et al
as 3:2014cv00357
Plaintiff:
Michael Bomberger
Defendant:
Theo Hanson and Heartland Coalition, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Theo Smith v. Ghana Commercial Bank, Ltd., et al
as 12-2795
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Theo Smith
Defendant - Appellee:
Ghana Commercial Bank, Ltd., Attorney General/Government of Ghana and John A. Mills
Smith v. Ghana Commercial Bank, Ltd. et al
as 0:2010cv04655
Plaintiff:
Theo Smith
Defendant:
Ghana Commercial Bank, Ltd., Attorney General/Government of Ghana and John A. Mills
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Theo Smith v. Ghana Commercial Bank, Ltd., et al
as 09-3615
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Theo Smith
Defendant - Appellee:
Ghana Commercial Bank, Ltd. and The Republic of Ghana
Smith v. Ghana Commercial Bank, Ltd. et al
as 0:2008cv05324
Plaintiff:
Theo Smith
Defendant:
Ghana Commercial Bank, Ltd. and Republic of Ghana, The
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1640 Truth in Lending
Theo Smith v. Ghana Commercial Bank, et al
as 08-2487
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Theo Smith
Defendant - Appellee:
Ghana Commercial Bank, Ltd. and The Republic of Ghana
Smith v. Ghana Commercial Bank, Ltd. et al
as 0:2007cv01447
Plaintiff:
Theo Smith
Defendant:
Ghana Commercial Bank, Ltd. and The Republic of Ghana
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1640 Truth in Lending
ADIGHIBE et al v. CLIFTON TELECARD ALLIANCE(CTA)
as 2:2007cv01250
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL ADIGHIBE, SAM ENYIA, STANLEY OGBUEHI and others
Defendant:
CLIFTON TELECARD ALLIANCE(CTA), CLIFTON TELECARD ALLIANCE(CTA) and IDS Telecom Corp d/b/a ClearTel
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Fraud
Ad Hoc Committee of Equity Holders of Tectonic Network Inc. v. Wolford et al
as 1:2006cv00665
Plaintiff:
Ad Hoc Committee of Equity Holders of Tectonic Network Inc.
Defendant:
Arol Wolford, Sherwin Krug, Charles McRoberts and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Fraud
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.
