Cases 1 - 6 of 6
Miller v. 1-800-Flowers.com, Inc.
as 16-3292
Plaintiff:
Debra Miller, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, William Thompson, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Brittany DiCarolis and others
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Debbie Williams, Regina Warfel, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Brett Reilly, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated and others
Defendant - Appellee:
Affinion Group, LLC, Apollo Global Management, LLC, Bank of America N.A. and others
Defendant:
1-800-Flowers.com, Inc., Adaptive Marketing, LLC, Days Inns Worldwide, Inc. and others
Chi et al v. Vertrue, Inc. et al
as 1:2014cv00614
Plaintiff:
C.Y.M Chi and V.L. Chi
Defendant:
Vertrue, Inc., Adaptive Marketing, LLC, Velo Holdings, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1962
Massinburge v. Abbott et al
as 4:2013cv01615
Defendant:
Greg Abbott, Macie D Miller, Frank G Pearce and others
Plaintiff:
Robert Earl Massinburge
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1961 Racketeering (RICO) Act
Miller et al v. 1-800-Flowers.com, Inc. et al
as 3:2012cv00396
Plaintiff:
Debra Miller, William Thompson, Brittany DiCarolis and others
Consolidated Plaintiff:
Hope Kelm, Barbara Timmcke, Regina Warfel and others
Defendant:
1-800-Flowers.com, Inc., Adaptive Marketing, LLC, Affinion Group, LLC and others
Consolidated Defendant:
Citigroup Inc. and Affinion, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1961 Racketeering (RICO) Act
Waslin v. Vertrue Inc et al
as 1:2009vm75002
Plaintiff:
Michael Waslin, Michael Waslin, Michael Waslin and others
Defendant:
Vertrue Inc., Vertrue Inc., Vertrue Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1962 Racketeering (RICO) Act
Waslin v. Vertrue Inc et al
as 3:2009cv00106
Plaintiff:
Michael Waslin and Michael Waslin
Defendant:
Vertrue Inc and Adaptive Marketing LLC
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
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.
